MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966623707 · doi:10.1115/detc2010-28801

Apparent Mass Responses of Seated Occupants Under Single and Dual (XZ) Axis Vibration

2010· article· en· W1966623707 on OpenAlexaff
S. Mandapuram, Subhash Rakheja, P.-É. Boileau, Setsuo Maeda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Vibration on Health
Canadian institutionsInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travailConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVibrationSagittal planeWhole body vibrationVertical axisCoupling (piping)Horizontal axisHorizontal planeDual (grammatical number)PhysicsLong axisStructural engineeringAcousticsGeologyGeometryMathematicsAnatomyMaterials scienceGeodesyEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the biodynamic responses of the seated body to two-axis vibration applied along the fore-aft and vertical directions in the 0.5 to 20 Hz range, independently and simultaneously, using 9 adult male subjects. The measurements were performed with the subjects seated with and without the hands and back supports under two different magnitudes of vibration. The apparent mass responses distributed over the seat pan and the back support are determined in order to better understand the dynamic interactions of the body with the back support under single as well as dual-axis vibration. The results suggest strong influences of the back and hand supports, and considerable cross-axis apparent mass along the vertical axis. Only minimal coupling effects of dual axis vibration, however, could be observed, although coupled sagittal plane motions were perceived by the subjects. Using the linear system theory, the total response along each axis was also computed from the direct and cross-axis responses to individual axes vibration, which emphasized contributions due to cross-axis response and thus the coupling effects of multi-axis vibration.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEffects of Vibration on HealthFrench-language works237,207