MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523223627 · doi:10.4236/wjm.2016.69022

Effect of Mechanical Vibrations on Human Body

2016· article· en· W2523223627 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Al‐Shabi, Walaa Araydah, H. L. Elshatarat, M.O. Othman, Mohammed Bani Younis, S. Andrew Gadsden

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Mechanics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVibrationHuman bodyPhysicsMaterials scienceAcousticsMedicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mechanical vibrations cause forces that affect human bodies. One of the most common positions for human bodies is the seated position. In this work, mathematical models of the seated human body are investigated and simulated in a Simulink/ MATLAB environment. In addition, segments of the human body are studied and models are developed and built by using Simulink/MATLAB. As part of this work, model analysis and state-space methods are used in order to check and validate the results obtained from the simulations. Two types of forces are used to test the whole seated human body under low frequency citation. The first is a sinusoidal wave signal based on literature, and the second is an impulse function. The effects of mechanical vibration on the head and lumbar are studied as these parts of the human body are usually the most effected areas. Kinematic states of the head segment and lumbar are considered. The characteristics of the vibration response on the two segments are also obtained. In addition to the me-chanical vibrations study, this paper is a resource for the development and implementation of models in the Simulink/MATLAB environment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.254
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 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of MechanicsSame topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207