Toward a Computational Model of the Upper Extremity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A basic 22-segment model of the upper extremity is formulated that can allow computational testing of hypotheses about the control and coordination of the upper extremity by the central nervous system. The formulation allows for further analytical, anatomical, physiological, and bio-mechanical expansion and improvement of the model. It allows for inclusion of all passive structures: ligaments, membranes, soft tissues, and cartilages. The formulation is based on the state space formulation of the Newton-Euler method applied to multi-body systems. Extensive use is made of three-segment rigid body modules, constraints, reduction of dimensionality, projection, and matrices of large dimensions.An example, gliding motion of a rigid body on a circular surface (as in wiping a dish with a pre-specified force of contact) shows the application of some of the concepts and feasibility of the developed routines. The control is based on analogous strategies in living systems where co-activation of agonist-antagonist muscular systems and precise reference inputs implement the desirable trajectories of motion and where an integral feedback of the force implements the desired forces of contact.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it