Yes. Both Neuropixels and Axoft’s Fleuron are penetrating neural interfaces, not ECoG.
The clean distinction is:
ECoG sits on the cortical surface and records broader population activity.
Neuropixels uses a thin shank inserted into brain tissue. The standard 1.0 probe is a 10 mm long, 70 × 24 µm shank with dense recording sites for action potentials and LFPs. (Neuropixels NEW)
Axoft Fleuron is also described as going into cortical or subcortical tissue rather than resting on the surface, with first-in-human reporting centered on in-tissue recordings and probe insertion during surgery. (MedRxiv)
So in ordinary language: yes, they’re both penetrating arrays/probes, though they are not the same kind of penetrating device.
The nuance, because apparently the brain refuses to be sorted into neat product bins:
Neuropixels is a rigid silicon, very high-density penetrating probe, famous for recording lots of single units across depth. (PMC)
Axoft Fleuron is a soft, ultrasoft penetrating probe family, aiming at more tissue-compliant implantation rather than classic rigid-silicon geometry. (MedRxiv)
So: same broad class, different design philosophy.
If you want the taxonomy in one line:
EEG = scalp, ECoG = surface, sEEG/depth electrodes = deep targets, Neuropixels/Axoft = penetrating in-tissue arrays.
1,000