MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414845836 · doi:10.1080/00140139.2025.2563366

An analysis of head and ear anthropometric data using 3D scans for head-wearable products

2025· article· en· W4414845836 on OpenAlexaff
Chang Ho Yu, Xin Cui, Heecheon You

Bibliographic record

VenueErgonomics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
FundersKorea Evaluation Institute of Industrial TechnologyNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsAnthropometryHead (geology)Significant differenceMean differenceBody height3d printed

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study analysed the anthropometric characteristics of an integrated head-ear dataset to advance the ergonomic design of head-wearable products. By integrating 3D scanning, casting techniques, and template registration methods, scan data from 200 Korean participants were processed and 88 head and ear dimensions were measured. Among the head and ear dimensions, 95.5% showed larger average sizes in males than in females (mean difference = 0.3-25.1 mm; mean ratio = 1.02-1.37), with males exhibiting 67.0% greater variability (SD ratio = 1.01-1.36). Significant age-related changes were observed in 30.7% of the dimensions, with the majority of significant increases occurring in ear height-related dimensions, which rose by 5.0-18.0% from individuals in their 20s to their 50s, such as ear length (mean ratio: 30s = 1.03, 40s = 1.04, 50s = 1.09). These results can be of use for designing head-wearable 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErgonomicsSame topicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersFrench-language works237,207