On the Two-Dimensional Simplification of Three-Dimensional Cementless Hip Stem Numerical Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) finite element (FE) models are commonly used to analyze the mechanical behavior of the bone under different conditions (i.e., before and after arthroplasty). They can provide detailed information but they are numerically expensive and this limits their use in cases where large or numerous simulations are required. On the other hand, 2D models show less computational cost, but the precision of results depends on the approach used for the simplification. Two main questions arise: Are the 3D results adequately represented by a 2D section of the model? Which approach should be used to build a 2D model that provides reliable results compared to the 3D model? In this paper, we first evaluate if the stem symmetry plane used for generating the 2D models of bone-implant systems adequately represents the results of the full 3D model for stair climbing activity. Then, we explore three different approaches that have been used in the past for creating 2D models: (1) without side-plate (WOSP), (2) with variable thickness side-plate and constant cortical thickness (SPCT), and (3) with variable thickness side-plate and variable cortical thickness (SPVT). From the different approaches investigated, a 2D model including a side-plate best represents the results obtained with the full 3D model with much less computational cost. The side-plate needs to have variable thickness, while the cortical bone thickness can be kept constant.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".