Poster Session III, July 15th 2010 — Abstracts Finite element analysis of the effect of loading curve shape on brain injury predictors
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
Traumatic (TBI) and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) occur in everyday incidents as well as sporting events, and their prediction has become important factor in prevention. Currently, the prediction of these injuries is limited to peak linear and angular acceleration values derived from laboratory reconstructions. With the advent of more powerful computers, the use of finite element modelling has become a research tool which is used in an effort to link linear and angular acceleration values to brain injury parameters such as stress and strain. However it remains unclear as to what aspect of these curves contributes to brain tissue damage. This research will use the University College Dublin Brain Trauma Model (UCDBTM) to analyze three distinct curve shapes, independently in each axis of linear and angular acceleration, and their effect on currently used predictors of TBI and mTBI. Three curve inputs were run through the UCDBTM, curve A had a late peak, curve B had an early peak, and curve C had a continuous plateau. All three curves had equivalent areas. Each curve was run in each axis, x, y, and z for linear and angular acceleration outputs. The results indicate that Curve A produced consistently higher maximum principal strains and Von Mises Stress than the other two curve types. Curve C consistently produced the lowest values, with Curve B being lowest in only 2 cases. The areas of peak Von Mises Stress and Principal strain also varied depending on curve shape and acceleration input.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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