MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132626824

Response of the biped head physical model to low level shock waves

2018· article· en· W7132626824 on OpenAlex
M.M.G.M. Philippens, B. de Jong, A. Zwanenburg, S. Ouellet, A. Bouamoul

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTNO Repository · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead (geology)Explosive materialDeformation (meteorology)Shock waveSkullFinite element methodShock (circulatory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The BIPED headform is specifically developed by Defence R&D Canada (DRDC) to assess the relative reduction of the risk of injury to the human brain (Blast Induced TBI: b-TBI), offered by combat helmets, from low-level shockwaves. These low level shockwaves may be encountered in theatre due to exposure to an improvised explosive devices or other explosive threats and can cause serious long-term effect on health. A study to improve the understanding of the load transfer mechanism from a shockwave to the brain simulant of the headform was performed using a 400 x 400 mm square shock tube. The BIPED was mounted on a crash dummy neck and exposed to shockwaves of two different loading levels having a peak overpressures of 90 and 160 kPa respectively and a duration of 10-15 milliseconds. The response of the bare headform was compared to the response of the headform with an open-face and full-face combat helmet. Pressures on the headform surface, pressures in the brain simulant as well as strain on the skull were measured. Various phases in brain pressure responses were identified. Application of a helmet appears to decrease the peak pressures in the first phase of the response but increased pressure amplitude during the third phase. A Finite Element study was performed to study shockwave load transfer into the brain from skull modal resonance. The FE study revealed that increase of the third phase pressure is most likely due to rigid body motion of the skull exciting the brain simulant, suspended in water in the skull cavity, in its modal resonance frequency. This rigid body motion effect appears to increase with the presence of a helmet. The study resulted in a better understanding of the shockwave – head interaction and the potential protection offered by combat helmets. It also showed that modal resonance frequencies of skull and brain are crucial in the load transfer to the brain and should be included in the biofidelity requirement for a head simulant used to assess the protection potential of PPEor operational protocols.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.270 · 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