Peak Penetration Force during Stabbing of Chest Wall with a CeremonialSword
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The force required for a sword to penetrate the human chest was identified as an important issue for the defense in a case of homicide by stabbing. Previous literature on penetration force had tested knives but not swords. Objective: The objective of the current study was to determine the peak force during penetration of a surrogate for human tissue with a ceremonial sword. Methods: The sword was secured to an MK-10 Tensile Tester and forced to penetrate a pork rib cut at speeds of 350 mm/min and 1100 mm/min, including both regions of rib and cartilage for pork ribs without skin or covered with a layer of porcine skin. Results: In the case of the pork ribs without skin, the mean peak penetration force at a speed of 350 mm/min was 11.0 N compared to a mean of 10.5 N at a speed of 1100 mm/min. The distributions of peak penetration forces at the two speeds were not significantly different. In the case of the pork ribs covered with porcine skin, the mean peak penetration force at a speed of 350 mm/min was 50.0 N compared to a mean of 47.6 N at a speed of 1100 mm/min. The distributions of peak penetration forces at the two speeds were again not significantly different. Conclusion: Forces of less than 50 N would be required for a ceremonial sword to penetrate the tissues of the human chest, although there is a risk of penetration for forces as low as 5 N when the effect of the porcine skin is not considered. Furthermore, the force required for penetration did not vary significantly over a three-fold speed of penetration.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".