Changes in muscle activities and kinematics due to simulated leg length inequalities
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
Muscle imbalances are a leading cause of musculoskeletal problems. One example are leg length inequalities (LLIs). This study aimed to analyze the effect of different (simulated) LLIs on back and leg muscles in combination with kinematic compensation mechanics. Therefore, 20 healthy volunteers were analyzed during walking with artificial LLIs (0-4 cm). The effect of different amounts of LLIs and significant differences to the reference condition without LLI were calculated of maximal joint angles, mean muscle activity, and its symmetry index. While walking, LLIs led to higher muscle activity and asymmetry of back muscles, by increased lumbar lateral flexion and pelvic obliquity. The rectus femoris showed higher values, independent of the amount of LLI, whereas the activity of the gastrocnemius on the shorter leg increased. The hip and knee flexion of the long leg increased significantly with increasing LLIs, like the knee extension and the ankle plantarflexion of the shorter leg. The described compensation mechanisms are explained by a dynamic lengthening of the short and shortening of the longer leg, which is associated with increased and asymmetrical muscle activity. Presenting this overview is important for a better understanding of the effects of LLIs to improve diagnostic and therapy in the future.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it