MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1899765755 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2015-0378

The coefficient of restitution of pressurized balls: a mechanistic model

2015· article· en· W1899765755 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Alex Georgallas, Gaëtan Landry

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSports Dynamics and Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsCoefficient of restitutionPhysicsMechanicsRestitutionSimple (philosophy)Ball (mathematics)Statistical physicsThermodynamicsClassical mechanicsGeometryMathematicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pressurized, inflated balls used in professional sports are regulated so that their behaviour upon impact can be anticipated and allow the game to have its distinctive character. However, the dynamics governing the impacts of such balls, even on stationary hard surfaces, can be extremely complex. The energy transformations, which arise from the compression of the gas within the ball and from the shear forces associated with the deformation of the wall, are examined in this paper. We develop a simple mechanistic model of the dependence of the coefficient of restitution, e, upon both the gauge pressure, P G , of the gas and the shear modulus, G, of the wall. The model is validated using the results from a simple series of experiments using three different sports balls. The fits to the data are extremely good for P G > 25 kPa and consistent values are obtained for the value of G for the wall material. As far as the authors can tell, this simple, mechanistic model of the pressure dependence of the coefficient of restitution is the first in the literature.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicSports Dynamics and BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207