MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155445883 · doi:10.1115/1.4050909

Model-Aided Design of a Rear-Impact Collision Testing System for In Vivo Investigations

2021· article· en· W3155445883 on OpenAlexaff
Jeff M. Barrett, Kayla M. Fewster, Jack P. Callaghan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollisionCrashMotor vehicle crashAccelerationCrash testSimulationComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringEngineeringPoison controlPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A collision testing device used to simulate rear-end impacts on human volunteers was developed and validated. The testing device was designed using impact parameters obtained from real crash-test-derived vehicle-to-vehicle rear-end collisions. Experimental results show the proposed testing device achieves repeatable impact parameters well within the reported ranges of real vehicle-to-vehicle rear-end impact simulations reported in the literature. In particular, the device was able to produce a 7.66 (0.30) km/h delta-v collision with a duration of 111.6 (6.2) ms, and a 4.75 (0.29) g peak acceleration.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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