MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977810163 · doi:10.1080/10255842.2010.548324

Development of a finite element model of the tibia for short-duration high-force axial impact loading

2011· article· en· W1977810163 on OpenAlexafffund
Cheryl E. Quenneville, Cynthia E. Dunning

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Centres of ExcellenceOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsCadaveric spasmFinite element methodStructural engineeringTibiaImpulse (physics)Boundary value problemBiomechanicsMaterials scienceEngineeringMathematicsSurgeryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finite element (FE) models can allow computer simulations of impact loading, providing a useful companion to cadaveric testing. These models allow injury evaluations to be conducted under a variety of conditions, but must be validated against experimental data. An FE model of a cadaveric tibia was developed using geometry from CT scans, and the quality of the mesh was evaluated. Loading and boundary conditions from experimental tests were simulated, and the model was optimised to best represent the response of natural bone to impacts. The model was shown to have good agreement for impact force, duration, impulse and strain during simulation of three non-injurious and one injurious axial impact when compared with experimental test data for the specimen. Failure criteria were evaluated for their ability to predict fracture. This model of the tibia can be used for future injury prediction assessment studies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical EngineeringSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207