MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2005870993 · doi:10.1115/sbc2013-14067

Validation of a Novel In-Vitro Simulator for Real-Time Control of Active Shoulder Movements in Various Planes of Motion

2013· article· en· W2005870993 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua W. Giles, Louis M. Ferreira, George S. Athwal, James A. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 1B: Extremity; Fluid Mechanics; Gait; Growth, Remodeling, and Repair; Heart Valves; Injury Biomechanics; Mechanotransduction and Sub-Cellular Biophysics; MultiScale Biotransport; Muscle, Tendon and Ligament; Musculoskeletal Devices; Multiscale Mechanics; Thermal Medicine; Ocular Biomechanics; Pediatric Hemodynamics; Pericellular Phenomena; Tissue Mechanics; Biotransport Design and Devices; Spine; Stent Device Hemodynamics; Vascular Solid Mechanics; Student Paper and Design Competitions · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsSimulationElbowShoulder jointComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Motion (physics)Motion captureMotion simulatorDeltoid curveRotation (mathematics)Motion controlBiomechanicsControl (management)MathematicsComputer visionArtificial intelligencePhysicsGeologyRobotGeometrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In-vitro simulation of active shoulder joint motion is critical to gaining an understanding of the effects of surgical procedures and implant designs. However, development of systems for the accurate simulation of active shoulder motion has lagged well behind those implemented for the lower limb and elbow, which have used principles of closed-loop joint angle control 1,4. In contrast, active shoulder motion has been confined to simulators that can hold static joint angles through the application of loads based on computer model outputs 2, or that use constant velocity of the middle deltoid while using open-loop control to apportion other muscle loads as a function of a-priori physiologic loading ratios 3. Neither of these schemes utilizes real-time feedback of kinematic data in order to follow smooth, predefined profiles. The lack of more refined shoulder simulators, based on control theory, can primarily be attributed to the complexity of shoulder motion and the number of degrees of freedom (DOFs) ( i.e. plane of abduction, abduction angle, and axial rotation) which must be controlled.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 1B: Extremity; Fluid Mechanics; Gait; Growth, Remodeling, and Repair; Heart Valves; Injury Biomechanics; Mechanotransduction and Sub-Cellular Biophysics; MultiScale Biotransport; Muscle, Tendon and Ligament; Musculoskeletal Devices; Multiscale Mechanics; Thermal Medicine; Ocular Biomechanics; Pediatric Hemodynamics; Pericellular Phenomena; Tissue Mechanics; Biotransport Design and Devices; Spine; Stent Device Hemodynamics; Vascular Solid Mechanics; Student Paper and Design Competitions→Same topicShoulder Injury and Treatment→French-language works237,207→