The application of standard nonlinear solid material models in modelling the tensile behaviour of the supraspinatus tendon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tendons transmit forces from muscles to bones through joints. Typically, tendons and muscles work together to innovate a motion. In addition, tendons are often subjected to much higher stresses than the muscles that they serve in any given action. As a result, tendons are susceptible to injuries that may lead to a permanent dysfunction in joint mobility due to the fact that the scar tissue that forms after healing often does not have the same mechanical properties of the original tissue. It is therefore very important to understand the mechanical response of tendons. In this paper the performances are examined of two viscoelastic standard nonlinear models in modelling the elastic and plastic behaviour of the tendon in the light of a well-known hyperelastic Yeoh model. The use of the Yeoh model is more for validating the performances of the viscoelastic models within the elastic region than for comparison purposes. The Yeoh model was selected based on its superior performance in modelling the elastic phase of soft tissue, as reported in previous studies, combined with its simplicity. The results show that the two standard nonlinear solid models perform extremely well both in fitting accuracies and in correlating stress results. The most promising result is the fact that the two standard nonlinear models can model tendon behaviour in the nonlinear plastic region. It is also noted that the two standard nonlinear models are physically insightful since their optimisation parameters can easily be interpreted in terms of tendon elasticity and viscoelastic parameters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".