Cross-cultural comparison of body dimensions and trends: an analysis of ANSUR and Size Korea datasets for automotive seating design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate the change in body dimensions over time in both Western (US) and Eastern (Korea) populations. In order to analyse the change of body dimension between the past and present and between western and eastern population, 13 body dimensions relating to automobile driver seat design were extracted from the ANSUR and Size Korea datasets at two time points, the past (ANSUR I: 1988, Size Korea: 1992) and the present (ANSUR II: 2012, Size Korea: 2012). Most of the dimensions differed significantly between past and present, as well as between the US and Korea. Overall, the data show an increasing trend of body dimensions over time for both genders. Based on the results, all countries should be encouraged to conduct periodic and national anthropometric research because body dimensions are continuously changing over time worldwide.Practitioner summary: This paper describes a study that investigates the changes in body dimensions over time in Western (US) and Eastern (Korean) populations. Findings indicate increasing trends in most dimensions for both populations, crucial for user-friendly product design and preventing hazards caused by faulty products.
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".