MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Neural-ADC-Compatible Fully-Dynamic Lossless Adaptive Resolution Compression Technique for Energy-Constrained Bio-Signal Recording

2023· article· en· W4390993401 on OpenAlexaff
Mina Sayedi, Hossein Kassiri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLossless compressionComputer scienceNyquist–Shannon sampling theoremCompression ratioNyquist rateElectronic engineeringCMOSMATLABSampling (signal processing)Data compressionComputer hardwareAlgorithmEngineeringComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a lossless adaptive-resolution compression technique intended for energy-constrained implantable neural interface microsystems. The proposed method seamlessly integrates with the widely-adopted ADC-direct front-end architectures with minimal overhead and no need for architectural modification, making it universally-compatible. It maintains an always-Nyquist sampling rate and employs a single-bit quantizer to overcome the limitations of previously-reported adaptive sampling and adaptive resolution methods (e.g., missing short-time events, nonlinearity, power/area overdesign). It also features continuous DC variation calculation and adjustable hysteresis bands. The method is optimized and validated through MATLAB simulations, followed by synthesis and implementation in a standard 130nm CMOS process, resulting in an active area of 0.0529 mm<sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> and total power consumption of 1.9µW @ 128kHz. Post-layout verification was conducted using prerecorded EEG and ECG datasets, demonstrating a minimum compression ratio of 83.75% of the theoretical maximum (i.e., $\frac{{{N_H}}}{{{N_L}}}$), highlighting its effectiveness for implantable neural recording devices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207