A study of upper-body postural parameters for measures of human-seat interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates how five selected upper-body parameters, including Neck Angle (NA), Head Angle (HA), Shoulder Alignment Angle (SAA), Thoracic Kyphosis Angle (TKA), and Sitting Acromial Height (SAH), are related to the measures of human-seat interaction in headrest region, which involve the perceived comfort, contact loading, and muscle activity. Experiments with 25 participants were carried out on a conventional aircraft seat at different conditions to identify and understand the significant upper body parameters that affect the human-seat interaction through cross-correlation analyses. The results show the occupant's initial HA, SAH, and SAA are correlated with multiple human-seat interaction measures for general seating. Among the body parameters investigated, HA appears to be the most influential factor in the seating experience in the upper body region under various sitting conditions. The head movement ( ) with different backrest inclinations is found to be closely associated with the headrest contact loading. This study highlights the dependence of the sitting experience on the characteristics of an individual's natural upper-body position and movement when seated, considering both subjective and objective measures. The findings from this study can be used as anthropometric reference guidelines in seat design and optimization to satisfy more customized demands from the perspective of the individual's body characteristics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".