Forward dynamics computational modelling of a cyclist fall with the inclusion of protective response using deep learning-based human pose estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single bicycle crashes, i.e., falls and impacts not involving a collision with another road user, are a significantly underestimated road safety problem. The motions and behaviours of falling people, or fall kinematics, are often investigated in the injury biomechanics research field. Understanding the mechanics of a fall can help researchers develop better protective gear and safety measures to reduce the risk of injury. However, little is known about cyclist fall kinematics or dynamics. Therefore, in this study, a video analysis of cyclist falls is performed to investigate common kinematic forms and impact patterns. Furthermore, a pipeline involving deep learning-based human pose estimation and inverse kinematics optimisation is created for extracting human motion from real-world footage of falls to initialise forward dynamics computational human body models. A bracing active response is then optimised for using a genetic algorithm. This is then applied to a case study of a cyclist fall. The kinematic forms characterised in this study can be used to inform initial conditions for computational modelling and injury estimation in cyclist falls. Findings indicate that protective response is an important consideration in fall kinematics and dynamics, and should be included in computational modelling. Furthermore, the novel reconstruction pipeline proposed here can be applied more broadly for traumatic injury biomechanics tasks. The tool developed in this study is available at https://kevgildea.github.io/KinePose/.
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 | 0.001 | 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".