ZMT zurich med tech

Sim4Life V9.6 is the latest version of our simulation platform for computational life science research, device design, and optimization, as well as safety and electromagnetic compliance evaluations. Sim4Life V9.6 removes a long-standing computational bottleneck in neurostimulation modeling and delivers platform refinements that make the resulting workflows faster and more intuitive. Key highlights include: Faster Neural Response Prediction: Generalized Activating Function (GAF) now supports clinically realistic MRG double-cable axon models, delivering near-NEURON accuracy while reducing computation times from hours/days to seconds/minutes. Automated Recruitment Curve Analysis: New integrated tools generate and compare recruitment curves across heterogeneous nerve populations, accelerating neurostimulation device evaluation and treatment planning. Enhanced Performance & Scalability: Faster project startup, improved handling of large anatomical/neural models, and support for NVIDIA Blackwell cloud GPUs for demanding optimization workloads. Improved User Experience & Automation: Modernized Python scripting environment and improved feedback during project loading and initialization. Sim4Life V9.6 Web is available on all our cloud platforms for commercial users, researchers, and students. Sim4Life V9.6 Desktop is available directly through the Automatic Software Update window in the Sim4Life GUI. Your current license file provided by ZMT remains valid for this version. A detailed list of all changes can be found in the Release History. We thank you for your valuable feedback and hope this release further enhances your productivity and workflows. For additional feedback or suggestions, please feel free to contact us at s4l-sales@zmt.swiss. The Sim4Life Team

When the stop button is pushed in the task manager, while a simulation is running, it will generate an event that is equivalent to "enforcing" a "convergence reached" state from the solver perspective. That's why the following log will appear inside the Solver-Log tab WARNING: Simulation end request received. The solvers starts to consider this. Steady state detected at iteration x, remaining time steps are y. Simulation performed z iterations. Elapsed time for 'Time Update' was xx:xx:xx wall clock time.

I've been comparing running EMLF simulations, in some cases assigning anode=100V and cathode = 0V, vs. anode = 50V and cathode = -50V. Theoretically, these should produce the same results, as the potential difference is the same in each, but that's not what I am finding. It seems as if a reason for this are the 'holes' in the simulation, which are assigned with the conductivity of the background material, which is air. This produces large regions of effectively 0 S/m conductivity within the model, leading to voxels that are solved as 0V throughout the simulation. These voxels then alter the path of current within the model, which would otherwise be limited to flowing between electrodes, particularly if a cathode is assigned as 0V for instance. Is the answer to this filling the models with a material that could be assigned as 'fat', as is done in the following paper? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41551-026-01684-w What else could be making these choices of electrode boundary conditions nonequivalent? @bryn would love your input on this.