MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285282854 · doi:10.5539/mer.v6n1p29

Towards a Cybernetic Model of Human Movement

2016· article· en· W2285282854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H. Hemami, Eric Tarr, Boren Li, Ashok Krishnamurthy, Bradley D. Clymer, Behzad Dariush

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Engineering Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOhio State University
KeywordsComputer scienceMovement (music)Kinesthetic learningModular designHuman–computer interactionHeuristicArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An elementary computational framework, as a first step to an eventual comprehensive model of human movement, is presented. Such a model in conjunction with anatomical, physiological and experimental studies should provide a means of verifying theoretical, experimental, and heuristic models of human movement. For this purpose, a three-dimensional three link humanoid model and a two-link planar arm model are presented to explore responses to simple external forces. Such models are useful for a variety of current applications in art, science, engineering, sports, and medicine. The models are subjected to kinesthetic, auditory, and visual inputs. Creating desired behavior is the goal. The models are flexible, modular, and expandable for inclusion of more segments, muscles, and sensory and central nervous system (CNS) processing. Three computer simulations are presented: rhythmic maneuvers of the three link model, in response to periodic motion of a platform, the planar arm producing visually observed alphabet-like characters in response to visual inputs, and processing of music to provide rhythms for a three-link dance.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical Engineering ResearchSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207