MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311292140 · doi:10.1115/1.4056459

The Mechanical Characterization and Comparison of Male and Female Calvaria Under Four-Point Bending Impacts

2022· article· en· W4311292140 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Adanty, Kapil Bharadwaj Bhagavathula, Olivia Tronchin, David X. Li, Karyne N. Rabey, Michael R. Doschak, Samer Adeeb, James D. Hogan, Simon Ouellet, Thomas Plaisted, Sikhanda Satapathy, Dan L. Romanyk, Christopher R. Dennison

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
FundersArmy Research Laboratory
KeywordsCalvariaBendingMaterials scienceThree point flexural testStructural engineeringBending momentFracture (geology)Strain rateComposite materialEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The circumstances in which we mechanically test and critically assess human calvarium tissue would find relevance under conditions encompassing real-world head impacts. These conditions include, among other variables, impact velocities, and strain rates. Compared to quasi-static loading on calvaria, there is less reporting on the impact loading of the calvaria and consequently, there are relatively fewer mechanical properties on calvaria at relevant impact loading rates available in the literature. The purpose of this work was to report on the mechanical response of 23 human calvarium specimens subjected to dynamic four-point bending impacts. Impacts were performed using a custom-built four-point impact apparatus at impact velocities of 0.86-0.89 m/s resulting in surface strain rates of 2-3/s-representative of strain rates observed in vehicle collisions and blunt impacts. The study revealed comparable effective bending moduli (11-15 GPa) to the limited work reported on the impact mechanics of calvaria in the literature, however, fracture bending stress (10-47 MPa) was relatively less. As expected, surface strains at fracture (0.21-0.25%) were less compared to studies that performed quasi-static bending. Moreover, the study revealed no significant differences in mechanical response between male and female calvaria. The findings presented in this work are relevant to many areas including validating surrogate skull fracture models in silico or laboratory during impact and optimizing protective devices used by civilians to reduce the risk of a serious 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 score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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