Abstract
Trigeminal somatosensory-evoked potentials (TSEPs) provide valuable insight into neural responses to oral stimuli. This study investigates TSEP recording methods and their impact on interpreting results in clinical settings to improve the development process of neurostimulation-based therapies. The experiments and results presented here aim at identifying appropriate stimulation characteristics to design an active dental prosthesis capable of contributing to restoring the lost neurosensitive connection between the teeth and the brain. Two methods of TSEP acquisition, traditional and occluded, were used, each conducted by a different volunteer. Traditional TSEP acquisition involves stimulation at different sites with varying parameters to achieve a control base. In contrast, occluded TSEPs examine responses acquired under low- and high-force bite conditions to assess the influence of periodontal mechanoreceptors and muscle activation on measurements. Traditional TSEPs demonstrated methodological feasibility with satisfactory results despite a limited subject pool. However, occluded TSEPs presented challenges in interpreting results, with responses deviating from expected norms, particularly under high force conditions, due to the simultaneous occurrence of stimulation and dental occlusion. While traditional TSEPs highlight methodological feasibility, the occluded approach highlights complexities in outcome interpretation and urges caution in clinical application. Previously unreported results were achieved, which underscores the importance of conducting further research with larger sample sizes and refined protocols in order to strengthen the reliability and validity of TSEP assessments.

Abstract
The increased demand for and use of autonomous driving and advanced driver assistance systems has highlighted the issue of abnormalities occurring within the perception layers, some of which may result in accidents. Recent publications have noted the lack of standardized independent testing formats and insufficient methods with which to analyze, verify, and qualify LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging)-acquired data and their subsequent labeling. While camera-based approaches benefit from a significant amount of long-term research, images captured through the visible spectrum can be unreliable in situations with impaired visibility, such as dim lighting, fog, and heavy rain. A redoubled focus upon LiDAR usage would combat these shortcomings; however, research involving the detection of anomalies and the validation of gathered data is few and far between when compared to its counterparts. This paper aims to contribute to expand the knowledge on how to evaluate LiDAR data by introducing a novel method with the ability to detect these patterns and complement other performance evaluators while using a statistical approach. Although it is preliminary, the proposed methodology shows promising results in the evaluation of an algorithm's confidence score, the impact that weather and road conditions may have on data, and fringe cases in which the data may be insufficient or otherwise unusable.

Abstract
Perception algorithms are essential for autonomous or semi-autonomous vehicles to perceive the semantics of their surroundings, including object detection, panoptic segmentation, and tracking. Decision-making in case of safety-critical situations, like autonomous emergency braking and collision avoidance, relies on the outputs of these algorithms. This makes it essential to correctly assess such perception systems before their deployment and to monitor their performance when in use. It is difficult to test and validate these systems, particularly at runtime, due to the high-level and complex representations of their outputs. This paper presents an overview of different existing metrics used for the evaluation of LiDAR-based perception systems, emphasizing particularly object detection and tracking algorithms due to their importance in the final perception outcome. Along with generally used metrics, we also discuss the impact of Planning KL-Divergence (PKL), Timed Quality Temporal Logic (TQTL), and Spatio-temporal Quality Logic (STQL) metrics on object detection algorithms. In the case of panoptic segmentation, Panoptic Quality (PQ) and Parsing Covering (PC) metrics are analysed resorting to some pretrained models. Finally, it addresses the application of diverse metrics to evaluate different pretrained models with the respective perception algorithms on publicly available datasets. Besides the identification of the various metrics being proposed, their performance and influence on models are also assessed after conducting new tests or reproducing the experimental results of the reference under consideration.

Abstract

Abstract
Heart failure (HF) is a multifactorial chronic syndrome with progressive increasing incidence causing a huge financial burden worldwide. Remote monitoring should, in theory, improve HF management, but given increasing morbidity and mortality, a question remains: are we monitoring it properly? Device-based home monitoring enables objective and continuous measurement of vital variables and non-invasive devices should be first choice for elderly patients. There is no shortage of literature on the subject, however, most studies were designed to monitor a single variable or class of variables that were not properly assembled and, to the best of our knowledge, there are no large randomized studies about their impact on HF patient management. To overcome this problem, we carefully selected the most critical possible HF decompensating factors to design MONITORIA, a non-invasive device for comprehensive HF home monitoring. MONITORIA stands for MOnitoring Non-Invasively To Overcome mortality Rates of heart Insufficiency on Ambulatory, and in this paper, which is part I of a series of three articles, we discuss the theoretical basis for its design. MONITORIA and its inherent follow-up strategy will optimize HF patient care as it is a promising device, which will essentially adapt innovation not to the disease but rather to the patients. (C) 2020 Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U.