MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996039818 · doi:10.1115/1.4045709

Density Variation in the Expanded Polystyrene Foam of Bicycle Helmets and Its Influence on Impact Performance

2019· article· en· W2996039818 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon G. Kroeker, Muammer Ç. Özkul, Alyssa L. DeMarco, Stephanie J. Bonin, Gunter P. Siegmund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpanded polystyreneHead (geology)PolystyreneBulk densityEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceComposite materialGeologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bicycle helmets attenuate head impacts using expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam liners. The EPS density plays a key role in determining the helmet and head response during an impact. Prior pilot work in our lab showed that EPS density varied by up to 18 kg/m3 within a single helmet, and thus the purpose of this study was to quantify the regional density variations within and between helmets and to establish how these variations influence helmet impact performance. We evaluated 10-12 samples of two traditional and two bicycle motocross (BMX) bicycle helmets with EPS liners. The bulk liner density and density of 16-19 cores extracted from specific locations on each sample were measured. Additional samples of two of these helmet models were then impacted at 3.0, 6.3, and 7.8 m/s to determine the relationship between local EPS density and helmet impact performance. We found that density varied significantly within each sample in all helmet models and also varied significantly between samples in three helmet models. The density variations were not symmetric across the midline in two of the four helmet models. The observed density variations influenced the helmets' impact performance. Our data suggest that variations in peak headform acceleration during impacts to the same location on different samples of the same helmet model can be partially explained by density differences between helmet samples. These density variations and resulting impact performance differences may play a role in a helmet's ability to mitigate head injury.

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)0.001
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 score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207