Modeling the effects of musculoskeletal geometry on scapulohumeral muscle moment arms and lines of action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomechanical investigations examining shoulder function commonly observe a high degree of inter-individual variability in muscle activity and kinematic patterns during static and dynamic upper extremity exertions. Substantial differences in musculoskeletal geometry between individuals can alter muscle moment arms and lines of action that, theoretically, alter muscle activity and shoulder kinematics. The purposes of this research were to: (i) quantify model-predicted functional roles (moment arms, lines of action) of the scapulohumeral muscles, (ii) compare model predictions to experimental data in the literature, and (iii) evaluate sensitivity of muscle functional roles due to changes in muscle attachment locations using probabilistic modeling. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to iteratively adjust muscle attachment locations at the clavicle, scapula, and humerus of the Delft Shoulder and Elbow Model in OpenSim. Muscle moment arms and lines of action were quantified throughout arm elevation in the scapular plane. In general, model-predicted moment arms agreed well with the reviewed literature; however, notable inconsistencies were observed when comparing lines of action. Variability in moment arms and lines of action were muscle-specific, with 2 standard deviations in moment arm and line of actions as high as 25.8 mm and 18.8° for some muscles, respectively. Moment arms were particularly sensitive to changes in attachment site closest to the joint centre. Variations in muscle functional roles due to differences in musculoskeletal geometry are expected to require different muscle activity and movement patterns for upper extremity exertions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".