MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412060379 · doi:10.35530/it.076.03.2024164

Impact of pattern lines and technological features on the behaviourof vamp-over-quarter footwear type

2025· article· en· W4412060379 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arina Seul, Mariana Costea, Aura Mıhaı, Raluca Lupu, Adriana Chirilă, Manuela Avădanei, Antonela Curteza

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustria Textila · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)EngineeringGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article aims to demonstrate how the positioning of the seam line between the vamp and quarter and the number of stitches affect the joint strength and overall performance of the product during walking. The configuration of analysis conditions and constraints was conducted using ANSYSTM. The gait biomechanics were considered to establish the load model, including the distribution of forces, their magnitudes, and constraints. The analysis focused on the three phases of gait: heel strike, mid-stance, and push-off, evaluating three key parameters: directional displacement, Von Mises stress, and elastic deformation. The study emphasises how directional displacement, stress distribution, and elastic deformation change based on the gait phase and the materials used in the construction of the selected footwear type. Using a two-stitch seam to join the components promotes directional displacements and reduces stress/tension compared to a single-stitch seam. Positioning the seam line between the vamp and quarters along the toe line increases stress/tension in the front section of the shoe. The analysis was validated by comparing simulation results with average plantar pressures obtained from a biomechanical assessment of plantar pressure distribution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustria TextilaSame topicTextile materials and evaluationsFrench-language works237,207