A Blind Trial Evaluation of a Crime Scene Methodology for Deducing Impact Velocity and Droplet Size from Circular Bloodstains<sup>*</sup>
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
In a previous study, mechanical engineering models were utilized to deduce impact velocity and droplet volume of circular bloodstains by measuring stain diameter and counting spines radiating from their outer edge. A blind trial study was subsequently undertaken to evaluate the accuracy of this technique, using an applied, crime scene methodology. Calculations from bloodstains produced on paper, drywall, and wood were used to derive surface-specific equations to predict 39 unknown mock crime scene bloodstains created over a range of impact velocities (2.2-5.7 m/sec) and droplet volumes (12-45 microL). Strong correlations were found between expected and observed results, with correlation coefficients ranging between 0.83 and 0.99. The 95% confidence limit associated with predictions of impact velocity and droplet volume was calculated for paper (0.28 m/sec, 1.7 microL), drywall (0.37 m/sec, 1.7 microL), and wood (0.65 m/sec, 5.2 microL).
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 | 0.033 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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