Human Postural Control Under High Levels of Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: International agencies such as the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) need further data to set international guidelines to protect workers and the public from potential adverse effects to Extremely Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields (ELF-MF). Interestingly, electromagnetic induction has been hypothesized to impact human vestibular function (i.e. through induced electric fields). To date, a theoretical 4 T/s vestibular threshold was proposed to modulate postural control, but data is lacking above this limit. Objectives: This research aimed to investigate the impact of full head homogeneous ELF-MF stimulations above the 4 T/s threshold on human postural control. Methods: Postural control of twenty healthy participants was analyzed while full head homogeneous ELF-MF stimulations (20 Hz, 60 Hz, and 90 Hz) up to 40 T/s were applied. Velocity, main direction and spatial dispersion of sway were used to investigate postural modulations. Results: Despite a conclusive positive control effect, no significant effects of ELF-MF exposures on velocity, spatial dispersion, and direction of the postural sway were found for our 3 frequency conditions. Conclusions: The homogeneous full head MF stimulations oriented vertically and delivered at high frequencies induced E-fields having a weaker impact than anticipated, possibly because they impacted only a small portion of the vestibular system. This resulted in an absence of effect on postural control outcomes.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".