Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40401149›Full record

ArticleAPL bioengineering2025

Optimization frameworks for bespoke sensory encoding in neuroprosthetics.

Franklin Leong, Silvestro Micera, Solaiman Shokur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in APL bioengineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Franklin LeongTranslational Neural Engineering Laboratory (TNE Lab), Neuro-X Institute, EPFL, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5510-5975

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Restoring natural sensation via neuroprosthetics relies on the possibility of encoding complex and nuanced information. For example, an ideal brain-machine interface with sensory feedback would provide the user with sensation about movement, pressure, curvature, texture, etc. Despite advances in neural interfaces that allow for complex stimulation patterns (e.g., multisite stimulation or the possibility of targeting a precise neural ensemble), a key question remains: How can we best exploit the potential of these technologies? The increasing number of electrodes coupled with more parameters being explored leads to an exponential increase in the number of possible combinations, making a brute-force approach, such as systematic search, impractical. This Perspective outlines three different optimization frameworks-namely, the explicit, physiological, and self-optimized methods-allowing one to potentially converge faster toward effective parameters. Although our focus will be on the somatosensory system, these frameworks are flexible and applicable to various sensory systems (e.g., vision) and stimulator types.

Identifiers

PMID40401149
PMCPMC12094799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.