MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2370008939

Development and Validation of a 6-Year-Old Child Finite Element Head Model

2012· article· en· W2370008939 on OpenAlexaff
Ruan Shi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead (geology)Finite element methodCadaverPolygon meshHuman headOrthodonticsShell (structure)Structural engineeringMaterials scienceMedicineEngineeringMathematicsAnatomyGeometryComposite materialGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work a three-dimensional finite element(FE) human head model of a six-year old child was developed.Geometrical data of the FE head model were extracted from a set of medical CT scan images of a six-year old child.Finite element meshes were created from the geometric data through the FE preprocessor.The child head model included 44 886 nodes,11 675 shell elements and 37 482 solid elements.The model included skulls,sutures,CSF,cerebrum,cerebellum,and brainstem.Material properties of the child head model were obtained from biomechanical literature.It took less than one hour CPU time for an 11 ms analysis in a workstation.Since there were no experimental test data of child head impact in the literature,Nahum's data were used for impact response comparison.Simulation results showed that the development of coup-contrecoup pressure during impact is suitable to be used in the analysis for the child head.The value of coup and contra-coup stresses were respectively 140 kPa and-60 kPa on the force of 7900 N and HIC value of 775 in the cadaver experiment.Under the same impact condition,the values of coup and contra-coup pressure were 220.2 kPa and-135.2 kPa and 160 kPa and-89 kPa,respectively.These data showed that child head was more vulnerable to the injury than adult head.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207