## 4 Discussion  
This study investigated the correlations between sEMG activity of the major mast-catory muscles and mandibular kinematics in 22 healthy volunteer subjects during the unilateral chewing cycle both on the left and right side. Focusing on outcomes, consistency was found in data collected through Modjaw(r) with previous studies conducted in 2023 regarding the mean condylar slope angle during protrusion movement. [PERSON] et al., who analyzed 30 healthy subjects with the age range of 21-23 without a history of trauma, orthodontic treatment, or temporomandibular disorders, found the sagittal condylar guidance to be 56.6\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 6.62\({}^{\circ}\)[21]. In our study, the right condylar slope angles (60.09\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 9.76\({}^{\circ}\)) were slightly higher on average compared to the left ones (58.82\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 7.82\({}^{\circ}\)). A study on 22 non-TMD volunteers (15 F/7 M; mean age: 22.2 years) reported sagittal condylar guidance of 51.07\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 9.43\({}^{\circ}\) using Modjaw(r), and the results of the present study were higher by 2\({}^{\circ}\)[4]. According to [PERSON] et al., differences of up to 26.1\({}^{\circ}\) between the right and left condylar slope angles were not uncommon; furthermore, they found no statistically significant association with skeletal class, age, gender, dentate status, TM] pathology, or parafunctional habits [22]. Bennett angles measured during lateral movements were on average 15.14\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 11.62\({}^{\circ}\) on the left side and 17.18\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 14.02\({}^{\circ}\) on the right side. Conversely, [PERSON] et al. found a mean value of 7.1\({}^{\circ}\)\(\pm\) 5.1\({}^{\circ}\) in mediotrusion. As supported by [PERSON] et al., the choice of condylar reference point significantly influences the three-dimensional excursions of the condylar points. Furthermore, the Bennett angle and Bennett shift exhibit significant variations depending on the position of the reference point during lateral movements. These findings underscore the importance of using a consistent condylar reference point for meaningful comparisons of condylar movements among different studies and highlight the need for a standardized consensus on the choice of condylar reference point [23]. Continuing the analysis from a kinematic perspective, in a study by [PERSON] et al., which tested masticatory cycle parameters using a jaw-tracking device in eight male patients aged 19-24 years with a diagnosis of Angle Class I malocclusion, the masticatory cycle height on the habitual side was found to be 12.43 \(\pm\) 3.11 mm. The mean value for unilateral chewing was 12.21 \(\pm\) 2.34 mm. These data were slightly lower than those observed in the present study. In the left trial, chewing resulted in a 2 mm increase compared to the mean of the right trial. In the same study, the parameters of masticatory cycle amplitude were also analyzed, resulting in a value of 9.49 \(\pm\) 0.87 on the habitual side and 9.61 \(\pm\) 1.77 for unilateral chewing. These results are consistent with the present study. However, similar to this work's findings, there was a slight increase in the parameters on the left side [24]. It must be said that the slight discrepancies with the previous studies could be related to the different samples, the test food used, and other protocol differences involved. No studies were found to compare the angle relative to the right or left chewing cycle graph from the incisal viewpoint. This angle was directly drawn and measured on the Modjaw(r) chewing cycle graph from the incisal viewpoint using the angle tool to evaluate chewing asymmetry between the left and right trials. Focalizing on electromyographic data, findings of the present study from assessments of unilateral chewing cycles on the right and left sides have revealed challenges in interpretation and comparison with other literature data.