MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1220836320 · doi:10.3233/oer-2004-4103

Estimation of load transfer force to the hands during sagittal plane box lifting

2004· article· en· W1220836320 on OpenAlexaff
Tammy Eger, Joan M. Stevenson

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Ergonomics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfer (computing)Sagittal planeLift (data mining)KinematicsSimulationMathematicsStructural engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Load transfer force to the hands was investigated to provide an accurate estimate of load transfer during sagittal lifting tasks for application in an industrial setting. The effects of gender, load mass, lift style, load transfer duration and participant strength were examined as possible variables to improve the estimation of load transfer force. Ten healthy men and eleven healthy women completed a total of 25 box lifts using a freestyle technique. Kinematic data were collected using the OPTOTRAK™ and a portable video camera. Measured load transfer force (MLTF) was determined as the total load weight minus measured values from a force plate. Five methods of estimating load transfer to the hands were calculated and compared with MLTF. The enhanced load transfer force method (ELTF) of estimating load transfer to the hands was superior to all other estimation methods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational ErgonomicsSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207