MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149166209 · doi:10.1115/1.2354205

An EFE Model on Skin-Sleeve Interactions During Arm Rotation

2006· article· en· W2149166209 on OpenAlexaff
Malcolm Xing, Zhiguo Sun, Ning Pan, Wen Zhong, Howard I. Maibach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRotation (mathematics)Human skinStructural engineeringModulusEngineeringSimulationMaterials scienceComputer scienceComposite materialArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skin and garment constitute a dynamic contact system for human body comfort and protection. Although dermatological injuries due to fabric actions during human body movement are common, there is still no general guidance or standard for measuring or evaluating skin/garment contact interactions, especially, during intense sports. A three-dimensional explicit finite element (EFE) model combined with Augmented Lagrange algorithm (ALA) is developed to simulate interactions between skin and fabric during rotation of the arm. Normalized effective shear stresses at the interface between skin and the sleeve during the arm rotation are provided to reflect the severity of the interactions. The effects due to changes in fabric properties, fabric-skin gap, and arm rotation rate are also illustrated. It has been demonstrated from our predictions that factors such as elastic modulus, friction coefficients, density of fabric, and the initial gap between skin and fabric influence significantly the shear stress and thus the discomfort and even injury potential to skin during intensive body movement such as sports and military. Thus this study for the first time confirms quantitatively that poorly chosen fabric with inappropriate garment design renders adverse actions on human skin.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicTextile materials and evaluationsFrench-language works237,207