MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086859301 · doi:10.1080/15389588.2014.885647

Anthropometric Specifications, Development, and Evaluation of EvaRID—A 50th Percentile Female Rear Impact Finite Element Dummy Model

2014· article· en· W2086859301 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTraffic Injury Prevention · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsWhiplashPercentileHybrid IIICrashCrash testPoison controlAnthropometrySide impactEngineeringVolunteerInjury preventionSimulationDisplacement (psychology)StatisticsStructural engineeringMedicineMathematicsPsychologyComputer scienceMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Whiplash-associated disorders (WADs), or whiplash injuries, due to low-severity vehicle crashes are of great concern in motorized countries and it is well established that the risk of such injuries is higher for females than for males, even in similar crash conditions. Recent protective systems have been shown to be more beneficial for males than for females. Hence, there is a need for improved tools to address female WAD prevention when developing and evaluating the performance of whiplash protection systems. The objective of this study is to develop and evaluate a finite element model of a 50th percentile female rear impact crash test dummy. METHODS: The anthropometry of the 50th percentile female was specified based on literature data. The model, called EvaRID (female rear impact dummy), was based on the same design concept as the existing 50th percentile male rear impact dummy, the BioRID II. A scaling approach was developed and the first version, EvaRID V1.0, was implemented. Its dynamic response was compared to female volunteer data from rear impact sled tests. RESULTS: The EvaRID V1.0 model and the volunteer tests compared well until ∼250 ms of the head and T1 forward accelerations and rearward linear displacements and of the head rearward angular displacement. Markedly less T1 rearward angular displacement was found for the EvaRID model compared to the female volunteers. Similar results were received for the BioRID II model when comparing simulated responses with experimental data under volunteer loading conditions. The results indicate that the biofidelity of the EvaRID V1.0 and BioRID II FE models have limitations, predominantly in the T1 rearward angular displacement, at low velocity changes (7 km/h). The BioRID II model was validated against dummy test results in a loading range close to consumer test conditions (EuroNCAP) and lower severity levels of volunteer testing were not considered. CONCLUSIONS: The EvaRID dummy model demonstrated the potential of becoming a valuable tool when evaluating and developing seats and whiplash protection systems. However, updates of the joint stiffness will be required to provide better correlation at lower load levels. Moreover, the seated posture, curvature of the spine, and head position of 50th percentile female occupants needs to be established and implemented in future models.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.276 · 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