MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Toward a realistic optoelectronic-based kinematic model of the hand: representing the transverse metacarpal arch reduces accessory rotations of the metacarpophalangeal joints

2015· article· en· W818447578 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsMetacarpophalangeal jointThumbJoint (building)AnatomyGrip strengthTransverse planeComputer scienceOrthodonticsMathematicsMedicinePhysicsStructural engineeringEngineeringSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A kinematic model representing the versatility of the human hand is needed to evaluate biomechanical function and predict injury risk in the workplace. We improved upon an existing optoelectronic-based kinematic hand model with grouped metacarpals by defining segmented metacarpals and adding the trapeziometacarpal joint of the thumb. Eight participants performed three static postures (neutral pose, cylinder grip, cap grip) to evaluate kinematic performance of three different models, with one, two, and four metacarpal segment(s). Mean distal transverse metacarpal arch angles in the four-segment metacarpal model were between 22.0° ± 3.3° (neutral pose) and 32.1° ± 3.7° (cap grip). Representation of the metacarpals greatly influenced metacarpophalangeal joint rotations. Both the two- and four-segment metacarpal models displayed significantly lower metacarpophalangeal joint 'supination' angles (than the one-segment model) for the fourth and fifth fingers. However, the largest reductions were for the four- versus one-segment models, with mean differences ranging from 9.3° (neutral pose) to 17.0° (cap grip) for the fourth finger and 16.3° (neutral pose) to 33.0° (cylinder grip) for the fifth finger. MCP joint abduction/adduction angles of the fourth and fifth fingers also decreased with segmentation of the metacarpals, although the lowest magnitudes generally occurred in the four-segment model. Overall, the four-segment metacarpal model produced the lowest accessory rotations in non-dominant axes, and best matched previous radiological studies that found MCP joint pronation/supination angles were typically less than 10°. The four-segment metacarpal model, with improved anatomic fidelity, will better serve future studies of detailed actions of the hand in clinical or work applications.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.267 · 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