Linear Estimation of the Rigid-Body Acceleration Field From Point-Acceleration Measurements
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among other applications, accelerometer arrays have been used extensively in crashworthiness to measure the acceleration field of the head of a dummy subjected to impact. As it turns out, most accelerometer arrays proposed in the literature were analyzed on a case-by-case basis, often not knowing what components of the rigid-body acceleration field the sensor allows to estimate. We introduce a general model of accelerometer behavior, which encompasses the features of all acclerometer arrays proposed in the literature, with the purpose of determining their scope and limitations. The model proposed leads to a classification of accelerometer arrays into three types: point-determined; tangentially determined; and radially determined. The conditions that define each type are established, then applied to the three types drawn from the literature. The model proposed lends itself to a symbolic manipulation, which can be readily automated, with the purpose of providing an evaluation tool for any acceleration array, which should be invaluable at the development stage, especially when a rich set of variants is proposed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it