MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2740230008 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2011-0009

APPROACHES TO NON-CONTACT ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT INJURY STUDIES: UTILITY OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

2011· article· en· W2740230008 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nicholas Ali, Gholamreza Rouhi, Gordon Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnterior cruciate ligamentACL injuryMultidisciplinary approachComputer scienceAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesBiomechanicsArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multidisciplinary design optimization (MDO) approach is proposed to aid in the prediction of non-contact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury mechanisms and risk factors. In this investigation the need for such an approach is argued based on an exhaustive evaluation of diverse factors that cause non-contact ACL injury, and the similarly numerous and different existing study approaches that have been carried out to investigate injury. The proposed MDO approach fuses patient data and existing study approaches via an artificial intelligent (AI) technique—absent in previous biomechanics investigations—so as to offer new insights into ACL injury prevention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.112 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering→Same topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques→French-language works237,207→