MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416396770 · doi:10.1080/24725838.2025.2583993

Predicting Discomfort from Workload Parameters – Towards the Design of Comfortable Work

2025· article· en· W4416396770 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Linda M. Rose, Ulf Orrenius, Patrick Neumann

Bibliographic record

VenueIISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRIKENNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKungliga Tekniska HögskolanAFA Försäkring
KeywordsWorkloadWork (physics)Field (mathematics)Empirical researchJob designData collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONSWe present empirical data on how perceived discomfort varies under different loading situations based on analyzed experimental data. We propose mathematical models to calculate endurance time and recovery needs based on employees' perceived physical discomfort. While this modeling approach needs further research and field trials, it opens the door for a novel, positively oriented approach for proactive ergonomics, supporting job design aimed at creating comfortable work.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueIISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human FactorsSame topicErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersFrench-language works237,207