Cited by 0Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesAnalog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design

A freestanding submicron electrocorticography electrode array

Open access
Wang, Chuchao, Liu, Zehan, Zhang, Wuhao, Yang, Ran, Li, Yi, Wang, Zhengfei, Chu, Dianwu, Zhou, Xing +11 more·2026·Nature Communications

Abstract

Electrocorticography electrode arrays (EEAs) are key brain-computer interfaces. To be freestanding, which lays the foundation of fabrication and implantation, EEAs need to maintain sufficient rigidity. However, to form seamless and damage-free contact on the cerebral cortex, EEAs should be super-flexible, raising a seemingly unsolvable dilemma. Here, inspired by dragonfly wings, we present a freestanding submicron EEA (fs-EEA) that combines rigidity and flexibility, which are typically mutually exclusive characteristics. A wing vein-like frame is introduced to enable the freestanding capability, while the wing membrane-like functional region of fs-EEA is reduced to 850-nm-thickness that boosts its softness. This fs-EEA ensures excellent cortical conformality and biocompatibility on male epileptic rat models, improves electrocorticographic amplitude and signal-to-noise ratio. Our vein-membrane hybrid structure strategy thus resolves the inherent contradiction of EEAs, and has the potential to support advances in brain science and related fields. Creating electrocorticography electrode arrays which are flexible enough for conformal contact but sufficiently rigid to be freestanding, is highly challenging. Here, inspired by dragonfly wings, the authors propose a vein-membrane hybrid structure strategy and develop a freestanding submicron EEA.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-026-77707-6

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Authors
Wang, C., Liu, Z., Zhang, W., Yang, R., Li, Y., Wang, Z., Chu, D., Zhou, X., Hong, W., Wang, S., Wang, X., Wang, J., Li, X., Zhang, W., Wang, G., Lu, S., Yin, J., Wu, M., & Liu, J.
Affiliations
  • Dalian University of Technology (CN)
  • Dalian Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Li, Yi
  • Yin, Jian
  • Wu, Mengxi
  • Liu, Junshan
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2026-09-08
Volume
17
Issue
1
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7203531761
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (cc-by)
Funders
  • Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (JYB2025XDXM908)
  • Dalian University of Technology (DUT25YG255)
  • Zhejiang University
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Analog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design
Keywords
free-standing electrodes, brain-computer interface, biocompatibility, flexible electronics, signal-to-noise ratio
MeSH terms
Electrocorticography, Animals, Cerebral Cortex, Electrodes, Electrodes, Implanted, Epilepsy, Male, Rats, Signal-To-Noise Ratio, Brain-Computer Interfaces, Odonata

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review