MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

15.5 Event-Based Spatially Zooming Neural Interface IC with 10nW/Input Reconfigurable-Inverter Fabric and Input-Adaptive Quantization

2025· article· en· W4408181536 on OpenAlexaff
Jianxiong Xu, Mustafa Kanchwala, Mohammad Abdolrazzaghi, Hanfeng Cai, Yu Huang, Jun‐Yu Ma, Chae Woo Lim, Lingyun Xu, Shucheng Gong, Wei-An Deng, Qin‐Pei Deng, Jin Che, Sudip Nag, Joshua Philippe Olorocisimo, Yanze Wang, José Sales Filho, Mandana Mohaved, Homeira Moradi, George V. Eleftheriades, Taufik A. Valiante, Roman Genov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsKrembil FoundationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZoomQuantization (signal processing)Computer scienceArtificial neural networkInterface (matter)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceEngineeringParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale neural interface ICs have tens of thousands of electrodes [1]–[3], enabling a wide range of applications including neural prostheses and therapeutic neuromodulation. However, the human brain contains 86 billion neurons and new frontiers in brain interfacing, such as understanding memory and cognition, will benefit from concurrent access to a million or more of implanted electrodes [4]. Modern microfabrication technologies, including silicon wafer thinning [1], allow for dense co-integration of electrodes and transistors on the same flexible substrate [1,4-6] and overcome the issue of the mega-scale electrode interconnect bottleneck [7]. The key remaining challenges are the low energy efficiency of neural ADCs and the high output data rate [4]. For example, one million inputs require 10nW/input ADC power - for a tissue-safe 10mW ADC total power budget [8], and a 200Gb/s wireless link - for 8b conversion at 25kHz [4]. However, the power dissipation of neural ADCs, either dedicated [9]–[12] or time-multiplexed [1-3,13], is over 50× higher, and implantable radios are at least 100× slower [14]–[15]. To address these challenges, neural spiking sparsity has been exploited in both off-line [16]–[17] and on-line [8], [18] methods of optimum electrode selection, but this leads to significant losses in recorded information [17] and requires$\text{near}-\cup \mathrm{W}/\text{inp}\lfloor\vert \mathrm{t}$power due to static circuit biasing [8], [18], respectively.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207