MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Isometric Pull-Push Strengths in Workspace: 1. Strength Profiles

2004· article· en· W1908398576 on OpenAlexaff
Biman Das, Yanqing Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsometric exercisePosition (finance)Push and pullOrthodonticsWorkspaceMathematicsMedicinePhysical therapyEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The isometric pull and push strength profiles of males and females were determined in seated and standing positions in the workspace. The strongest pull strength location was at extreme reach vertically above the shoulder for both males and females. The greatest pull strength of 400 Newtons (N) for males was recorded in the seated and standing positions. Females' pull strengths in the seated and standing positions were 222 and 244 N, respectively. The strongest push strength was always at the maximum reach at the overhead location. Males' maximum push strength was 227 N in the seated position and 251 N in the standing position. Females' maximum push strength was 96 N in the seated position and 140 N in the standing position. On the average the strength in the standing position was 79% of the seated position. The push strength was 71% of the pull strength and females were 56% as strong as males.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations53
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Occupational Safety and ErgonomicsSame topicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersFrench-language works237,207