Elucidating the scapulo-humeral rhythm calculation: 3D joint contribution method
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scapulo-humeral rhythm quantifies shoulder joint coordination during arm elevation. The common method calculates a ratio of gleno-humeral (GH) elevation to scapulo-thoracic upward rotation angles. However the other rotations also contribute to arm elevation. The objective is to propose a 3D dynamic scapulo-humeral rhythm calculation method including all rotations of the shoulder joints and compare with the common method. Twenty-nine skin markers were placed on the trunk and dominant arm of 14 healthy males to measure shoulder kinematics. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs were applied to compare the two methods of calculation of joint contributions and scapulo-humeral rhythm during arm elevation. Significant main effects (p < 0.05) were observed between methods in joint contribution angles and scapulo-humeral rhythms. A systematic overestimation of the GH contribution was observed when only using the GH elevation angle because the scapula is moved outside a vertical plane. Hence, the proposed 3D method to calculate the scapulo-humeral rhythm allows an improved functional shoulder evaluation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it