Biomechanical Study Using Fuzzy Systems to Quantify Collagen Fiber Recruitment and Predict Creep of the Rabbit Medial Collateral Ligament
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In normal daily activities, ligaments are subjected to repeated loads, and respond to this environment with creep and fatigue. While progressive recruitment of the collagen fibers is responsible for the toe region of the ligament stress-strain curve, recruitment also represents an elegant feature to help ligaments resist creep. The use of artificial intelligence techniques in computational modeling allows a large number of parameters and their interactions to be incorporated beyond the capacity of classical mathematical models. The objective of the work described here is to demonstrate a tool for modeling creep of the rabbit medial collateral ligament that can incorporate the different parameters while quantifying the effect of collagen fiber recruitment during creep. An intelligent algorithm was developed to predict ligament creep. The modeling is performed in two steps: first, the ill-defined fiber recruitment is quantified using the fuzzy logic. Second, this fiber recruitment is incorporated along with creep stress and creep time to model creep using an adaptive neurofuzzy inference system. The model was trained and tested using an experimental database including creep tests and crimp image analysis. The model confirms that quantification of fiber recruitment is important for accurate prediction of ligament creep behavior at physiological loads.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".