MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136273758 · doi:10.1109/86.895951

Determination of generic body-seat interface shapes by cluster analysis

2000· article· en· W2136273758 on OpenAlexaff
Yue Li, Rachid Aïssaoui, David M. Brienza, J. Dansereau

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCushionInterface (matter)WheelchairCluster (spacecraft)Computer scienceStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine typical or generic shape patterns of the buttock-seat interface for elderly wheelchair users. The group of subjects was composed of 30 elderly people (aged 65 or older) and the shapes of the body-seat interface were measured by the electronic shape sensor (ESS). By analyzing the dissimilarity in geometrical shape descriptors or parameters, four distinct generic shapes were identified by means of the cluster analysis method. The results suggest that the generic shapes were mainly characterized by the lateral symmetry of the shapes. The determination of elderly people's seat interface shapes into distinct clusters may lead to a more comprehensive understanding of the seat support interface and more effective seat cushion designs.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation EngineeringSame topicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersFrench-language works237,207