MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058203407 · doi:10.1002/ajpa.10359

Functional anatomy of the olecranon process in hominoids and plio‐pleistocene hominins

2003· article· en· W2058203407 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle S.M. Drapeau

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physical Anthropology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOlecranonArboreal locomotionBiologyAnatomyBipedalismLeverPrimateUlnaElbowPaleontologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the functional morphology of the olecranon process in hominoids and fossil hominins. The length of the bony lever of the triceps brachii muscle (TBM) is measured as the distance between the trochlear articular center and the most distant insertion site of the TBM, and olecranon orientation is measured as the angle that this bony lever makes with the long axis of the ulna. Results show that Homo, Pan, Gorilla, most monkeys, and the Australopithecus fossils studied have similar relative olecranon lengths. Suspensory hominoids and Ateles have shorter olecranons, suggesting, in some instances, selection for greater speed in extension. The orientation that the lever arm of the TBM makes with the long axis of the ulna varies with preferred locomotor mode. Terrestrial primates have olecranons that are more posteriorly oriented as body size increases, fitting general models of terrestrial mammalian posture. Arboreal quadrupeds have more proximally oriented lever arms than any terrestrial quadrupeds, which suggests use of the TBM with the elbow in a more flexed position. Olecranon orientation is not consistent in suspensory hominoids, although they are all characterized by orientations that are either similar or more posterior than those observed in quadrupeds. Homo and the fossils have olecranons that are clearly more proximally oriented than expected for a quadruped of their size. This suggests that Homo and Australopithecus used their TBM in a flexed position, a position most consistent with manipulatory activities.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations57
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physical AnthropologySame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207