MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032388283 · doi:10.4271/2011-01-0257

Assessment Metric Identification and Evaluation for Side Airbag (SAB) Development

2011· article· en· W2032388283 on OpenAlexaff
Kalu Uduma, Jianping Wu, Brian Beaudet, Darshan Subhash Pawargi

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsChrysler (Canada)
FundersNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
KeywordsAirbagMetric (unit)Identification (biology)Computer scienceEngineeringAutomotive engineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses steps for identifying, evaluating and recommending a quantifiable design metric or metrics for Side Airbag (SAB) development. Three functionally related and desirable attributes of a SAB are assumed at the onset, namely, effective SAB coverage, load distribution and efficient energy management at a controlled force level. The third attribute however contradicts the “banana shaped” force-displacement response that characterizes the ineffective energy management reality of most production SAB. In this study, an estimated ATD to SAB interaction energy is used to size and recommend desired force-deformation characteristic of a robust energy management SAB. The study was conducted in the following three phases and corresponding objectives: Phase 1 is a SAB assessment metric identification and estimation, using a uniform block attached to a horizontal impact machine. Phase 2 uses a CAE correlated horizontal impactor and an anthropomorphic test device (ATD) to verify and validate the test tool and methodology that were used in phase 1. The third phase uses simulated pole and barrier, in sled CAE models to assess the relevance of the identified SAB metric or metrics in terms of ATD responses. After good SAB to ATD coverage is achieved, results from this study show that the force-deformation response of the SAB is crucial for an effective and overall ATD energy management that enhances robust ATD response. Therefore the study establishes force-deformation response (F-D) and energy management (EA) as significant design metrics that will be used to size and sort different SAB designs. The ability to size a SAB at the component level will invariably greatly reduce SAB development time and overall development cost. The suggested SAB response characteristics are assessed, using CAE for the oblique pole sled and IIHS-DSI sled test simulations. Results from these assessment simulations and the desirable identified SAB attributes are presented and discussed in this paper.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207