MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006436477 · doi:10.1520/jai101890

Translational and Rotational Accelerations Generated During Reconstructed Ice Hockey Impacts on a Hybrid III Head Form

2009· article· en· W2006436477 on OpenAlexaff
Natalie R Coulson, Scott Foreman, T. Blaine Hoshizaki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of ASTM International · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Neurotrauma Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyHybrid IIIHead (geology)Head and neckAngular accelerationAccelerometerAccelerationPhysicsGeodesyPoison controlGeologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineClassical mechanicsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, the relationship between flagrant impacts to the head and peak translational and rotational accelerations in reconstructed ice hockey impacts was examined. A Hybrid III head-neck complex attached to a sliding table and equipped with nine accelerometers was fitted with an ice hockey helmet and impacted under various striking conditions through the head form’s center of mass. Eight right-hand-dominant male ice hockey players carried out three maximal impacts for each of the striking techniques, and peak translational and rotational accelerations were measured. It was found that the highest mean translational and rotational accelerations were generated during the slashing trials to a static head form (138 g and 14,100 rad/s2, respectively), while the lowest mean translational and rotational accelerations were produced in the static crosschecking (26.5 g) and moving crosschecking trials (2,260 rad/s2), respectively. The reconstruction of illegal impacts reflecting flagrant fouls in ice hockey can generate peak translational and rotational accelerations great enough to cause concussive injuries. Accordingly, these types of injurious infractions must be prevented.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ASTM InternationalSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207