Sensing of stimulus artifact suppressed signals from electrode interfaces.
Abstract
Stimulus artifacts inhibit reliable acquisition of biological evoked potentials for several milliseconds if an electrode contact is utilized for both electrical stimulation and recording purposes. This hinders the measurement of evoked short-latency biological responses, which is otherwise elicited by stimulation in implantable prosthetic devices. We present an improved stimulus artifact suppression scheme using two electrode simultaneous stimulation and differential readout using high-gain amplifiers. Substantial reduction of artifact duration has been shown possible through the common-mode rejection property of an instrumentation amplifier for electrode interfaces. The performance of this method depends on good matching of electrode-electrolyte interface properties of the chosen electrode pair. A novel calibration algorithm has been developed that helps in artificial matching of impedance and thereby achieves the required performance in artifact suppression. Stimulus artifact duration has been reduced down to 50 μs from the stimulation-cum-recording electrodes, which is ~6× improvement over the present state of the art. The system is characterized with emulated resistor-capacitor loads and a variety of in-vitro metal electrodes dipped in saline environment. The proposed method is going to be useful for closed-loop electrical stimulation and recording studies, such as bidirectional neural prosthesis of retina, cochlea, brain, and spinal cord.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Dual-electrode in-phase stimulation and differential acquisition at the recording electrodes uses the common mode suppression characteristics of a differential input to reduce artifacts.
“This method uses the common mode suppression characteristics of a differential input to reduce the artifacts.”
From Advances in Neural Recording and Stimulation Integrated Circuits (2021) · cites this paper as Nag et al., 2015
The dual-electrode method showed good artifact suppression effect, but requires the electrode impedance to be highly matched.
“The experimental result showed good artifact suppression effect, but this method requires the electrode impedance to be highly matched.”
From Advances in Neural Recording and Stimulation Integrated Circuits (2021) · cites this paper as Nag et al., 2015
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 31 · Cited by 20
- Authors
- Nag, S., Sikdar, S. K., Thakor, N. V., Rao, V. R., & Sharma, D.
- Affiliations
- Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IN)
- Indian Institute of Science Bangalore (IN)
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Venue
- IEEE Sensors Journal
- Published
- 2015-07
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 3734-3742
- ISSN
- 1530-437X (ISSN-L)
- 1558-1748
- 2379-9153
- OpenAlex
- W2007172258
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 1.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Sensors Journal (publishedVersion)
- NOT FOUND REPOSITORY (Indian Institute of Science Bangalore) (acceptedVersion)
- National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
- DSpace (IIT Bombay) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Research Foundation Singapore Competitive Research Program Program (NRF-CRP10-2012-01)
- National University of Singapore, Singapore
- Agency for Science, Technology and Research
- Tata Consultancy Services
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Analog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
- Keywords
- evoked potentials, differential readout, instrumentation amplifier, common-mode rejection, electrode-electrolyte interface, impedance matching, calibration algorithm, high-gain amplifier, neural prosthesis
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