MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974784615 · doi:10.1142/s021951941000368x

A NUMERICAL TECHNIQUE TO EVALUATE THE FLEXURAL STIFFNESS OF LONG BONES AFFECTED BY CRACKS AND POROSITY

2010· article· en· W1974784615 on OpenAlexafffund
Hadi Mohammadi, Fereshteh Bahramian, Kibret Mequanint, Amin S. Rizkalla

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanics in Medicine and Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsStiffnessPorosityMaterials scienceFinite element methodBone resorptionStructural engineeringResorptionProcess (computing)Fracture (geology)Flexural strengthAccelerationComposite materialComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bone maintains its structure through a constant process of resorption and formation, in a process called bone remodeling. An imbalance in this process caused by disease, abnormal mechanical demands, or fatigue may predispose bone to fracture injuries. Increase in bone resorption can increase the number of surface cracks and structural porosity of the bone and thus change its stiffness properties. In this study, a computational technique is proposed to investigate the stiffness properties in long bones based on dynamic responses. As the first attempt, defects such as porosity and cracks are detected based on changes in stiffness properties of the sample. The least square algorithm and the finite element method are used as tools in this study. The Wilson-θ numerical method is employed to generate artificially experimental results for acceleration vectors. The data obtained from the artificial experiment is later employed to the proposed computational investigation model as raw data.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mechanics in Medicine and BiologySame topicElasticity and Material ModelingFrench-language works237,207