Head and Neck Response of an Active Human Body Model and Finite Element Anthropometric Test Device During a Linear Impactor Helmet Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been proposed that neck muscle activation may play a role in head response resulting from impacts in American Football. The importance of neck stiffness and active musculature in the standard linear impactor helmet test was assessed using a detailed head and neck finite element (FE) model from a current human body model (HBM) compared to a validated hybrid III head and neck FE model. The models were assessed for bare-head and helmeted impacts at three speeds (5.5, 7.4, and 9.3 m/s) and three impact orientations. The HBM head and neck was assessed without muscle activation and with a high level of muscle activation representing a braced condition. The HBM and hybrid III had an average cross-correlation rating of 0.89 for acceleration in the primary impact direction, indicating excellent correspondence regardless of muscle activation. Differences were identified in the axial head acceleration, attributed to axial neck stiffness (correlation rating of 0.45), but these differences did not have a large effect on the overall head response using existing head response metrics (head injury criteria, brain injury criteria, and head impact power). Although responses that develop over longer durations following the impact differed slightly, such as the moment at the base of the neck, this occurred later in time, and therefore, did not considerably affect the short-term head kinematics in the primary impact direction. Though muscle activation did not play a strong role in the head response for the test configurations considered, muscle activation may play a role in longer duration events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".