Stochastic resonance in the sensory systems and its applications in neural prosthetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noise is generally considered to be detrimental. In the right conditions, however, noise can improve signal detection or information transmission. This counterintuitive phenomenon is called stochastic resonance (SR). SR has generated significant interdisciplinary interest, particularly in physics, engineering, and medical and environmental sciences. In this review, we discuss a growing empirical literature that suggests that noise at the right intensity may improve the detection and processing of auditory, sensorimotor, and visual stimuli. We focus particularly on applications of SR in sensory biology and investigate whether SR-based technologies present a pathway to improve outcomes for individuals living with sensory impairments. We conclude that there is considerable evidence supporting the application of SR in developing sensory prosthetics. However, the progression of SR-based technologies is variable across the sensory modalities. We suggest opportunities for further advancements in each modality, considering the best approaches to maximise benefits and capitalise on progress already made. Overall, SR can offer opportunities to improve existing technologies or to motivate innovations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".