MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123489802 · doi:10.4271/2021-01-0876

Snowmobile Pole Crash Tests

2021· article· en· W3123489802 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Paquette, Harrison Griffiths, D.K.Y. Wong, Steve Anderson, Mark Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Advances and Current Practices in Mobility · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation Safety and Impact Analysis
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrashCrash testParagraphStructural engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Instrumented crash tests are a valuable source of information for collision reconstruction, as the collected data allows for a better understanding of the dynamics and severity of real-world collisions. Numerous published crash tests exist for automobiles, motorcycles, and heavy vehicles; however, none of the published crash testing has involved snowmobiles. This paper presents the results of six snowmobile crash tests to begin to fill the gap in the literature. In five tests, the test snowmobile was accelerated forward into a pole, made from a tree trunk 33 cm in diameter. In the last test, two snowmobiles collided head-on into each other. Prior to testing, each snowmobile was weighed and scanned using a Faro 3D scanner. All of the snowmobiles were instrumented to collect speed and acceleration data during the tests. Each snowmobile was scanned after the test, which allowed for measurements of the extent of crush from impact.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Advances and Current Practices in MobilitySame topicTransportation Safety and Impact AnalysisFrench-language works237,207