Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 103 references

History Matters: Damage-Mediated Amplification of Brain Deformation and Injury Risk under Repeated Head Impacts

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Repeated head impacts can soften brain tissue enough to push deformation and injury-risk estimates above what single-impact models predict.

desk verdict First full-head Mullins-damage repeated-loading study; the qualitative amplification claim holds up within the model, but the quantitative risk numbers rest on quasi-static damage parameters transferred to impact-rate loading. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10331 v1 pith:5BROVAGB submitted 2026-08-11 q-bio.TO physics.bio-phphysics.comp-ph

Carson Cooper , Anu Tripathi , Genevieve Palardy , Kshitiz Upadhyay This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.TOphysics.bio-phphysics.comp-ph
keywords traumaticbraininjuryrepeatedheadimpactsMullinseffectOgden-Roxburghdamagemodelfiniteelementriskpredictiontissuesofteningmixedmartialarts
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper takes on a blind spot in computational head-injury modeling: impacts are usually simulated one at a time, even though real exposure comes in sequences. It builds a high-fidelity finite-element head model in which the brain bulk softens across loading cycles through a Mullins-type damage law (a material's stress response weakening after repeated loading to the same level) calibrated to cyclic human brain tissue, and runs both controlled five-cycle single-axis loadings and a randomized twenty-cycle multiaxial sequence derived from mixed martial arts head impacts. The result is that prior loading changes the mechanical response: strain, strain rate, and tissue-based injury probabilities grow from cycle to cycle in the damage model while a damage-free model stays nearly flat. A sympathetic reader would take the paper to be establishing that the mechanical state of the brain before an impact is as important as the kinematics of the impact itself, and that ignoring history could make single-impact models underestimate repeated-impact injury risk.

What carries the argument

The load-carrying object is the Ogden–Roxburgh pseudoelastic Mullins damage model, implemented as a history-dependent multiplier on the deviatoric stress of a neo-Hookean brain tissue. The damage variable is $\eta = 1 - \frac{1}{r}\,\mathrm{erf}\left(\frac{W_{\mathrm{dev,max}} - W_{\mathrm{dev}}}{m}\right)$, where $W_{\mathrm{dev,max}}$ is the maximum distortional strain energy the material point has ever reached and $W_{\mathrm{dev}}$ is the current value; the error-function form makes softening rapid at first and saturating later. Because $\eta$ remains below one until the tissue exceeds its previous maximum, each element remembers earlier cycles, and this memory is what turns identical kinematics into different strains. The parameters $r=1.2$ and $m=0.05$ kPa come from cyclic human brain tissue tests, making the softening organ-specific rather than generic rubber behavior.

What would settle it

Run cyclic tension-compression tests on human brain tissue at strain rates near 100 per second and fit the Ogden–Roxburgh parameters to the observed second-cycle softening; if the measured $r$ and $m$ differ strongly from $r=1.2$ and $m=0.05$ kPa, the amplification predictions do not transfer to impact conditions. An organ-scale check would deliver two identical head rotations a few seconds apart in tagged-MRI experiments and compare the second strain field to the first.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that loading history itself is a mechanical variable in head injury: when brain tissue undergoes short-term Mullins-type softening, identical head kinematics produce progressively larger tissue deformation, so injury-risk estimates that ignore prior softening can understate the danger. In five-cycle single-axis simulations, the Mullins-based model showed cycle-to-cycle increases in the 95th-percentile cumulative maximum principal strain (CMPS95), the cumulative strain damage measure at a 0.15 threshold (CSDM15), strain-rate metrics, and strain-based AIS2 injury probabilities, with the largest jump between cycles 1 and 2, while the hyperelastic model stayed within a few percent of its first-cycle values and UBrIC-based probabilities, which depend only on kinematics, did not change. In the twenty-cycle multiaxial sequence, cycles of similar kinematic intensity produced different predictions depending on accumulated softening; the Mullins-based model generally produced the largest estimates in later cycles and the highest probability of at least one injury by cycle 20 (CMPS95-based 77.0% versus 50.0% and 67.9% for HE and LVHE; CSDM15-based 99.9% versus 95.3% and 88.1%). Regional results show amplification is spatially heterogeneous and direction-dependent, with white matter evolving faster than grey matter in all tested directions, gyral elements carrying higher absolute strain, and sulcal elements showing larger proportional amplification.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that brain tissue softens between rapid impacts the same way it does in slow laboratory cycling tests, and equally across all brain regions; if the softening is weaker, slower, or uneven at impact speeds, the predicted amplification and its spatial pattern would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Under identical single-axis loading, five cycles push CMPS95, CSDM15, and strain-rate metrics upward in the Mullins-based model while a damage-free hyperelastic model stays nearly flat, so repeated impacts with the same kinematics are not mechanically equivalent to one impact.
  • Kinematics-only criteria such as UBrIC cannot register prior softening; in the multiaxial sequence, the Mullins-based CMPS95 injury probability rose from cycle 1 to 2 and from cycle 10 to 11 even as the UBrIC-based probability fell, so repeated-exposure risk needs tissue-state-aware measures.
  • Damage-free HE and LVHE models can dominate early-cycle predictions, but the Mullins-based model overtakes them in later cycles and yields the highest probability of at least one injury over the 20-cycle sequence (CMPS95-based 77.0% versus 50.0% and 67.9%; CSDM15-based 99.9% versus 95.3% and 88.1%).
  • Regional and gyral–sulcal patterns depend on loading direction and accumulated softening: white matter evolves faster than grey matter under all directions, gyral elements carry higher absolute CMPS, and sulcal elements show larger relative amplification.
  • Because the bounded damage variable approaches saturation, further identical cycles produce diminishing increases, so the amplification is a rapid early effect rather than an unbounded one.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension the paper does not run is varying the rest interval between cycles: the model uses a 200 ms rest while recovery of cyclic softening is reported to take roughly an hour, so the predicted amplification should shrink as the interval lengthens if the mechanism is physical.
  • Applying the same damage-aware pipeline to football, soccer, or military blast exposure sequences could quantify how much of the variability in subconcussive outcomes is mechanical history rather than per-impact severity.
  • If high-rate cyclic tests show weaker or rate-dependent softening, the early-cycle dominance of LVHE and the later-cycle dominance of the Mullins-based model could reorder; a coupled nonlinear visco-hyperelastic damage formulation would be the direct next model to test.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper implements an Ogden–Roxburgh Mullins damage model in a high-fidelity, subject-specific finite element head model and applies repeated head-loading histories derived from MMA impact data. Under five identical single-axis cycles, the Mullins-based model shows progressive increases in CMPS95, CSDM15, strain-rate metrics, and strain-based AIS2 injury probabilities, while a hyperelastic (HE) comparison model remains nearly constant and UBrIC-based predictions are unchanged. Under a randomized twenty-cycle multiaxial sequence, the Mullins-based model produces larger late-sequence deformation and the highest probability of at least one injury over the sequence (77.0% by CMPS95 vs 50.0% HE and 67.9% LVHE), despite lower initial estimates. The study also reports regional differences in damage-evolution coefficients and higher absolute CMPS in gyral than sulcal elements, with larger proportional amplification in sulci. The authors conclude that short-term damage-mediated softening can substantially amplify tissue deformation and injury-risk estimates relative to damage-free models under the same prescribed loading histories, while noting that rate-dependent, region-specific, and recovery behavior remain experimentally uncharacterized.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper identifies a mechanistic pathway through which repeated head impacts could produce escalating tissue deformation and injury risk even when kinematics are identical or declining, which is a meaningful departure from conventional isolated-impact head modeling. The strengths of the study are the clean controlled comparisons that isolate the Mullins damage effect, the subject-specific tagged-MRI validation effort, and the unusually candid treatment of limitations. The paper makes its assumptions explicit, provides detailed constitutive equations in the supplement, and does not overstate the mechanistic link between the constitutive damage variable and biological injury. However, the quantitative magnitude of the claimed amplification rests on an unverified transfer of quasi-static Mullins parameters to impact-rate loading, and the strained-volume-fraction validation is marginal; these issues affect the strength of the central quantitative claim rather than the existence of the qualitative effect.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.1 (Table 1) and §2.2.2] The quasi-static Mullins parameters r=1.2 and m=0.05 kPa from Franceschini et al. (2006) are applied rate-independently to 15 ms impact pulses, and the model contains no viscoelastic dissipation in the brain bulk. This transfer is load-bearing for the abstract's quantitative claim that softening can 'substantially amplify' deformation and injury risk. The validation in §S1.2 shows that this formulation produces oscillations absent in the tagged-MRI data, and Section 4 acknowledges that the rate-independent formulation reflects available calibration evidence rather than demonstrated rate behavior. The magnitude of the reported amplification, including the 77.0% vs 50.0% sequence-level CMPS95-based probabilities, is therefore conditional on an untested assumption. The authors should either add a rate-dependent damage formulation or clearly reframe the quantitative results as an upper-bound scenario pending impact-rate cyclic tissue data.
  2. [§S1.2, Table S1; results in §3.1 and §3.2] The strained-volume-fraction validation for the Mullins model receives only 'Marginal' CORA scores (e.g., MPS>0.01 CORA=0.283), yet CSDM15-based injury probabilities are reported as primary results in Figures 7, 8, and 11. The paper itself notes in Section 4 that greater confidence should be placed in CMPS95 trends than CSDM15 trends. This is a direct conflict between the validation evidence and the weight given to CSDM15-based sequence-level probabilities (99.9% vs 88.1%). The manuscript should either demote CSDM15-based probability estimates to a secondary role in the abstract and conclusions or provide additional justification for why the marginal strained-volume-fraction agreement is sufficient for quantitative CSDM15 risk predictions.
  3. [§2.3.1, multiaxial loading protocol] The multiaxial sequence uses a hand-chosen scaling factor of 0.25 applied to the sampled angular velocities, chosen to prevent 'immediate saturation of injury metrics.' The sequence-level probability comparisons in §3.2, including the 77.0% vs 50.0% CMPS95-based result, depend directly on this scaling factor, and no sensitivity analysis is provided. Because the relative ordering of the models changes with accumulated damage, it is plausible that a different scaling factor or a different random seed could alter not only the absolute probabilities but also the cycle at which the Mullins-based model overtakes the damage-free models. The authors should report sensitivity to the scaling factor and to the stochastic sampling, or explicitly characterize the reported sequence-level probabilities as illustrative single-realization outcomes.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2.3.1] The choice of a 200 ms rest period is justified by strain decay, but the sensitivity of the results to this inter-cycle interval is not examined; given that Budday et al. (2020) report recovery over ~60 min, a brief sentence on how longer rest periods would diminish the predicted amplification would help readers interpret the time scale of the claimed effect.
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (26)] The regional damage evolution coefficients k are obtained from exponential fits to only five data points per region and direction, but no goodness-of-fit statistics are reported; the inset figure suggests some fits may be poorly constrained, so the authors should report R² or confidence intervals for the fitted k values.
  3. [§2.3.1] The text states that standard deviations are not used in the single-axis cases, but the axial and coronal mean values are used without a discussion of whether these cases are representative of typical MMA impacts given the large standard deviations reported in Table 4.
  4. [Throughout] There are minor typographical issues, such as 'T able 1' in the text preceding Table 1, and inconsistent hyphenation of 'Mullins-based' (e.g., 'Mullins-based' vs 'Mullins based'); these should be corrected during revision.
  5. [§4, gyral–sulcal analysis] The discussion of the higher absolute gyral CMPS compared with previous sulcal-strain studies is fair, but the authors could strengthen it by noting that the present analysis uses only 75 manually selected pairs, and a sensitivity check on the pairing procedure would increase confidence in the reported p<0.001 differences.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported strain amplification is a forward simulation result from externally calibrated Mullins parameters, not an input renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

This paper is a forward finite element simulation study rather than a closed-form derivation, and its central claim does not reduce to its inputs by construction. The Mullins damage parameters (r=1.2, m=0.05 kPa) are taken from published quasi-static cyclic human brain tissue tests by Franceschini et al. (2006), and the hyperelastic/viscoelastic brain properties are taken from Alshareef et al. (2021); none of these parameters are fitted to the paper's target CMPS95, CSDM15, strain-rate, or injury-probability outputs. The injury risk functions are the externally published relations of Wu et al. (2022) and Gabler et al. (2018), and the loading histories are derived from independent MMA head-impact datasets. The central result, that the Mullins-based model produces progressive deformation amplification under identical inertial loading, is a numerical consequence of constitutive softening interacting with organ-scale dynamics; it is not equivalent by definition to the constitutive law, because the strain outcome is solved from the full finite element momentum balance rather than defined by the damage variable. The constancy of UBrIC is indeed by definition, since UBrIC depends only on prescribed kinematics, but the paper explicitly states this and uses it as a comparison baseline rather than as a prediction. Self-citations such as Alshareef et al. (2021) and Upadhyay et al. (2022) supply material properties, model-construction pipelines, and validation data that are independently grounded in MRE and tagged-MRI measurements, so they are not load-bearing in a circular sense. The manuscript's own Section 4 acknowledges the rate-independent and region-uniform Mullins assumption as a limitation; that is a correctness and generalizability risk, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on constitutive parameters and loading choices carried from prior literature or chosen by hand; none are fitted to the paper's target outcomes, but several are unverified for impact-rate loading.

free parameters (6)
  • Mullins damage parameter r = 1.2
    Controls maximum Mullins softening (eta_min = 1 - 1/r). Calibrated by Franceschini et al. (2006) to quasi-static cyclic human brain tissue; used directly here.
  • Mullins damage energy scale m = 0.05 kPa
    Sets strain-energy scale over which softening evolves. Same source as r.
  • Brain shear modulus mu = 6.44 kPa
    Hyperelastic shear modulus for brain bulk, from MRE-based subject-specific model (Alshareef et al. 2021).
  • Brain bulk modulus K = 1.46 GPa
    Near-incompressibility bulk modulus from Alshareef et al. (2021).
  • Multiaxial angular velocity scaling factor = 0.25
    Sampled MMA angular velocities are multiplied by 0.25 to prevent immediate saturation of injury metrics (Sec. 2.3.1). This hand-chosen factor strongly affects multiaxial injury probability magnitudes.
  • Inter-cycle rest period = 200 ms
    Chosen for computational efficiency and to let brain strains decay below 10% of peak before next cycle (Sec. 2.3.1). Assumes no Mullins recovery over this interval.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard finite-strain continuum mechanics and hyperelasticity background (deformation gradient, invariants, neo-Hookean form).
    Background used to formulate the constitutive model (Sec. 2.1).
  • domain assumption Brain tissue cyclic softening is well described by Ogden-Roxburgh pseudoelasticity with parameters from Franceschini et al. (2006), applied isotropically and rate-independently to all brain substructures.
    Central assumption enabling the model; acknowledged as a limitation in Sec. 4.
  • domain assumption The FE head model validated against sub-injurious tagged MRI remains valid for the injurious impact kinematics simulated here.
    Validation (Supplementary S1) is for a mild deceleration; the loading range is extrapolated.
  • domain assumption Mullins softening does not recover during the 200 ms rest periods between cycles.
    Assumed based on Budday et al. (2020) reporting recovery after roughly 60 min, but short-timescale recovery is not experimentally resolved (Sec. 2.3.1).
  • domain assumption Injury risk functions of Wu et al. (2022) transfer to this specific head model.
    IRFs were calibrated using other computational head models; the paper acknowledges model-form uncertainty (Sec. 4).
  • ad hoc to paper Injury occurrences across loading cycles are independent conditional on cycle-specific probabilities for sequence-level estimates.
    Bernoulli independence approximation in Eq. (27), acknowledged as not representing biological changes after injury (Sec. 4).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of History Matters: Damage-Mediated Amplification of Brain Deformation and Injury Risk under Repeated Head Impacts." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5BROVAGB

@misc{pith2026260810331,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: History Matters: Damage-Mediated Amplification of Brain Deformation and Injury Risk under Repeated Head Impacts},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5BROVAGB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10331}
}
read the original abstract

Computational head models are typically applied to isolated impacts, leaving repeated head loading largely unexplored. An Ogden-Roxburgh Mullins damage formulation was implemented in a high-fidelity finite element head model to represent loading-history-dependent softening during cyclic brain-tissue deformation. Repeated-loading histories derived from mixed martial arts head-impact data were applied and compared with damage-free hyperelastic (HE) and linear visco-hyperelastic (LVHE) model variants. Under five identical single-axis cycles, Mullins-type softening progressively increased strain and strain rate metrics relative to the HE model. Mullins-based injury probabilities progressively exceeded strain-based HE predictions and diverged from unchanged kinematics-based predictions, indicating that neglecting prior softening may underestimate injury risk. In a randomized twenty-cycle multiaxial sequence, cycles of similar kinematic intensity produced different deformation and injury-risk estimates depending on prior softening. HE and LVHE models predicted higher injury probabilities initially, whereas the Mullins-based model produced the largest later-cycle estimates and highest probability of at least one injury over the sequence. Regional amplification depended on loading direction and prior softening, with no direction-independent trend among brain substructures. Gyral elements exhibited higher cumulative maximum principal strain than sulcal elements, which showed greater amplification relative to initial responses. These findings demonstrate that short-term damage-mediated softening can substantially amplify tissue deformation and injury-risk estimates beyond damage-free head models under the same loading histories. Further experimental characterization of cyclic brain-tissue softening is needed to improve models of repeated head loading and traumatic brain injury.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Knutsen and Curtis L

    Kshitiz Upadhyay and Ahmed Alshareef and Andrew K. Knutsen and Curtis L. Johnson and Aaron Carass and Philip V. Bayly and Dzung L. Pham and Jerry L. Prince and K. T. Ramesh , doi =. Development and validation of subject-specific 3D human head models based on a nonlinear visco-hyperelastic constitutive framework , volume =. Journal of the Royal Society Int...

  2. [2]

    and Alshareef, Ahmed and Knutsen, Andrew K

    Upadhyay, Kshitiz and Giovanis, Dimitris G. and Alshareef, Ahmed and Knutsen, Andrew K. and Johnson, Curtis L. and Carass, Aaron and Bayly, Philip V. and Shields, Michael D. and Ramesh, K.T. , doi =. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , keywords =

  3. [3]

    A pseudo-elastic model for the Mullins effect in filled rubber , volume =

    R W Ogden and D G Roxburgh , issue =. A pseudo-elastic model for the Mullins effect in filled rubber , volume =. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A , keywords =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1999.0431 , pages =

    work page arXiv 1999

  4. [4]

    2004 , address =

    ABAQUS Theory Manual, Version 6.5 , author =. 2004 , address =

    2004

  5. [5]

    Holzapfel , publisher =

    Gerhard A. Holzapfel , publisher =. Nonlinear Solid Mechanics , year =

  6. [6]

    Constitutive Modeling of Brain Tissue: Current Perspectives , volume =

    Rijk De Rooij and Ellen Kuhl , doi =. Constitutive Modeling of Brain Tissue: Current Perspectives , volume =. Applied Mechanics Reviews , month =

  7. [7]

    Fundamentals of Continuum Mechanics , address =

    John W Rudnicki , edition =. Fundamentals of Continuum Mechanics , address =

  8. [8]

    Franceschini and D

    G. Franceschini and D. Bigoni and P. Regitnig and G. A. Holzapfel , doi =. Brain tissue deforms similarly to filled elastomers and follows consolidation theory , volume =. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids , keywords =

Show all 103 references
  1. [9]

    Large Elastic Deformations of Homogeneous Anisotropic Materials , volume =

    J L Ericksen and R S Rivlin , journal =. Large Elastic Deformations of Homogeneous Anisotropic Materials , volume =

  2. [10]

    Finite Element Methods in Human Head Impact Simulations: A Review , volume =

    Amit Madhukar and Martin Ostoja-Starzewski , doi =. Finite Element Methods in Human Head Impact Simulations: A Review , volume =. Annals of Biomedical Engineering , month =

  3. [11]

    Ovaert and Gerhard A

    Silvia Budday and Timothy C. Ovaert and Gerhard A. Holzapfel and Paul Steinmann and Ellen Kuhl , doi =. Fifty Shades of Brain: A Review on the Mechanical Testing and Modeling of Brain Tissue , volume =. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering , month =

  4. [12]

    Effect of Stretching on the Properties of Rubber , volume =

    L Mullins , issue =. Effect of Stretching on the Properties of Rubber , volume =. Journal of Rubber Research , month =

  5. [13]

    Salat and Evelina Busa and Larry J

    Bruce Fischl and André Van Der Kouwe and Christophe Destrieux and Eric Halgren and Florent Ségonne and David H. Salat and Evelina Busa and Larry J. Seidman and Jill Goldstein and David Kennedy and Verne Caviness and Nikos Makris and Bruce Rosen and Anders M. Dale , doi =. Auto...

  6. [14]

    FreeSurfer , volume =

    Bruce Fischl , doi =. FreeSurfer , volume =. NeuroImage , keywords =

  7. [15]

    Ségonne and A

    F. Ségonne and A. M. Dale and E. Busa and M. Glessner and D. Salat and H. K. Hahn and B. Fischl , doi =. A hybrid approach to the skull stripping problem in MRI , volume =. NeuroImage , keywords =

  8. [16]

    Yushkevich and Joseph Piven and Cody Hazlett, Heather and Gimpel Smith, Rachel and Sean Ho and James C

    Paul A. Yushkevich and Joseph Piven and Cody Hazlett, Heather and Gimpel Smith, Rachel and Sean Ho and James C. Gee and Guido Gerig , title =. Neuroimage , doi =. 2006 , volume =

    2006

  9. [17]

    Sex-related difference in human white matter volumes studied: Inspection of the corpus callosum and other white matter by VBM , volume =

    Akihiko Shiino and Yen Wei Chen and Kenji Tanigaki and Atsushi Yamada and Piers Vigers and Toshiyuki Watanabe and Ikuo Tooyama and Ichiro Akiguchi , doi =. Sex-related difference in human white matter volumes studied: Inspection of the corpus callosum and other white matter by...

  10. [18]

    and Vosburgh, Kirby G

    Kikinis, Ron and Pieper, Steve D. and Vosburgh, Kirby G. 3D Slicer: A Platform for Subject-Specific Image Analysis, Visualization, and Clinical Support. Intraoperative Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy. 2014. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-7657-3_19

    2014 doi

  11. [19]

    Pham and John A

    Jeffrey Glaister and Aaron Carass and Dzung L. Pham and John A. Butman and Jerry L. Prince , address =. Falx Cerebri Segmentation via Multi-atlas Boundary Fusion , year =. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv , month =. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-66182-7 , isbn =

    doi

  12. [20]

    Pham and John A

    Jeffrey Glaister and Aaron Carass and Dzung L. Pham and John A. Butman and Jerry L. Prince , address =. Automatic falx cerebri and tentorium cerebelli segmentation from magnetic resonance images , volume =. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng , month =. doi:10.1117/12.2255640 , isbn =

    doi

  13. [21]

    Hellyer and David J

    Mazdak Ghajari and Peter J. Hellyer and David J. Sharp , doi =. Computational modelling of traumatic brain injury predicts the location of chronic traumatic encephalopathy pathology , volume =. Brain , keywords =

  14. [22]

    Investigation of Traumatic Brain Injuries Using the Next Generation of Simulated Injury Monitor (SIMon) Finite Element Head Model , volume =

    Erik G Takhounts and Stephen A Ridella and Vikas Hasija and Rabih E Tannous and J Quinn Campbell and Dan Malone and Kerry Danelson and Joel Stitzel and Steve Rowson and Stefan Duma , journal =. Investigation of Traumatic Brain Injuries Using the Next Generation of Simulated In...

    doi

  15. [23]

    Ganpule and N

    S. Ganpule and N. P. Daphalapurkar and M. P. Cetingul and K. T. Ramesh , doi =. Effect of bulk modulus on deformation of the brain under rotational accelerations , volume =. Shock Waves , keywords =

  16. [24]

    Fagan and Sikhanda S

    Brian T. Fagan and Sikhanda S. Satapathy and J. Neal Rutledge and Steven E. Kornguth , doi =. Simulation of the Strain Amplification in Sulci Due to Blunt Impact to the Head , volume =. Frontiers in Neurology , keywords =

  17. [25]

    Knutsen and Curtis L

    Ahmed Alshareef and Andrew K. Knutsen and Curtis L. Johnson and Aaron Carass and Kshitiz Upadhyay and Philip V. Bayly and Dzung L. Pham and Jerry L. Prince and K. T. Ramesh , doi =. Integrating material properties from magnetic resonance elastography into subject-specific comp...

  18. [26]

    R. J.H. Cloots and H. M.T. Gervaise and J. A.W. Van Dommelen and M. G.D. Geers , doi =. Biomechanics of traumatic brain injury: Influences of the morphologic heterogeneities of the cerebral cortex , volume =. Annals of Biomedical Engineering , keywords =

  19. [27]

    Sharp and Mazdak Ghajari , doi =

    Harry Duckworth and David J. Sharp and Mazdak Ghajari , doi =. Smoothed particle hydrodynamic modelling of the cerebrospinal fluid for brain biomechanics: Accuracy and stability , volume =. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering , keywords =

  20. [28]

    Development of Brain Injury Criteria (BrIC) , volume =

    Erik G Takhounts and Matthew J Craig and Kevin Moorhouse and Joe Mcfadden and Vikas Hasija , journal =. Development of Brain Injury Criteria (BrIC) , volume =. doi:10.4271/2013-22-0010 , pages =

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    Simulation of head impact leading to traumatic brain injury , year =

    Paul A Taylor and Corey C Ford , institution =. Simulation of head impact leading to traumatic brain injury , year =

  22. [30]

    , title =

    Moerman, Kevin M. , title =. 2018 , publisher =. doi:10.21105/joss.00506 , url =

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    Effect of modeling subject-specific cortical folds on brain injury risk prediction under blunt impact loading , volume =

    Anu Tripathi and Alison Brooks and Traci Snedden and Peter Ferrazzano and Christian Franck and Rika Wright Carlsen , doi =. Effect of modeling subject-specific cortical folds on brain injury risk prediction under blunt impact loading , volume =. Biomechanics and Modeling in Me...

  24. [32]

    Surface-based versus voxel-based finite element head models: comparative analyses of strain responses , volume =

    Zhou Zhou and Xiaogai Li and Svein Kleiven , doi =. Surface-based versus voxel-based finite element head models: comparative analyses of strain responses , volume =. Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology , keywords =

  25. [33]

    Brain response to primary blast wave using validated finite element models of human head and advanced combat helmet , volume =

    Liying Zhang and Rahul Makwana and Sumit Sharma , doi =. Brain response to primary blast wave using validated finite element models of human head and advanced combat helmet , volume =. Frontiers in Neurology , keywords =

  26. [34]

    Wright and Andrew Post and Blaine Hoshizaki and Kaliat T

    Rika M. Wright and Andrew Post and Blaine Hoshizaki and Kaliat T. Ramesh , doi =. A multiscale computational approach to estimating axonal damage under inertial loading of the head , volume =. Journal of Neurotrauma , keywords =

  27. [35]

    Genthikatti and Xin Jin and Feng Zhu and Rahul Makwana and Amandeep Gill and Gurdeep Jandir and Amrinder Singh and King H

    Haojie Mao and Liying Zhang and Binhui Jiang and Vinay V. Genthikatti and Xin Jin and Feng Zhu and Rahul Makwana and Amandeep Gill and Gurdeep Jandir and Amrinder Singh and King H. Yang , doi =. Development of a finite element human head model partially validated with thirty f...

  28. [36]

    Ford and Jonathan G

    Songbai Ji and Wei Zhao and James C. Ford and Jonathan G. Beckwith and Richard P. Bolander and Richard M. Greenwald and Laura A. Flashman and Keith D. Paulsen and Thomas W. McAllister , doi =. Group-wise evaluation and comparison of white matter fiber strain and maximum princi...

  29. [37]

    Tissue-Level Thresholds for Axonal Damage in an Experimental Model of Central Nervous System White Matter Injury , volume =

    Allison C Bain and David F Meaney , journal =. Tissue-Level Thresholds for Axonal Damage in an Experimental Model of Central Nervous System White Matter Injury , volume =. doi:10.1115/1.1324667 , month =

    doi

  30. [38]

    Gabler and Jeff R

    Lee F. Gabler and Jeff R. Crandall and Matthew B. Panzer , doi =. Development of a Metric for Predicting Brain Strain Responses Using Head Kinematics , volume =. Annals of Biomedical Engineering , keywords =

  31. [39]

    Injury prediction and vulnerability assessment using strain and susceptibility measures of the deep white matter , volume =

    Wei Zhao and Yunliang Cai and Zhigang Li and Songbai Ji , doi =. Injury prediction and vulnerability assessment using strain and susceptibility measures of the deep white matter , volume =. Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology , keywords =

  32. [40]

    Knutsen and Elizabeth Magrath and Julie E

    Andrew K. Knutsen and Elizabeth Magrath and Julie E. McEntee and Fangxu Xing and Jerry L. Prince and Philip V. Bayly and John A. Butman and Dzung L. Pham , doi =. Improved measurement of brain deformation during mild head acceleration using a novel tagged MRI sequence , volume...

  33. [41]

    Wu and Taylor H

    Kaveh Laksari and Michael Fanton and Lyndia C. Wu and Taylor H. Nguyen and Mehmet Kurt and Chiara Giordano and Eoin Kelly and Eoin O'Keeffe and Eugene Wallace and Colin Doherty and Matthew Campbell and Stephen Tiernan and Gerald Grant and Jesse Ruan and Saeed Barbat and David ...

  34. [42]

    Grant and Alon Friedman and Ronel Veksler and Michael G

    Eoin O'Keeffe and Eoin Kelly and Yuzhe Liu and Chiara Giordano and Eugene Wallace and Mark Hynes and Stephen Tiernan and Aidan Meagher and Chris Greene and Stephanie Hughes and Tom Burke and John Kealy and Niamh Doyle and Alison Hay and Michael Farrell and Gerald A. Grant and ...

  35. [43]

    Biomechanical assessment of various punching techniques , volume =

    Jiri Adamec and Peter Hofer and Stefan Pittner and Fabio Monticelli and Matthias Graw and Jutta Schöpfer , doi =. Biomechanical assessment of various punching techniques , volume =. International Journal of Legal Medicine , keywords =

  36. [44]

    Gabler and Hamed Joodaki and Jeff R

    Lee F. Gabler and Hamed Joodaki and Jeff R. Crandall and Matthew B. Panzer , doi =. Development of a Single-Degree-of-Freedom Mechanical Model for Predicting Strain-Based Brain Injury Responses , volume =. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering , keywords =

  37. [45]

    A quantitative relationship between rotational head kinematics and brain tissue strain from a 2-D parametric finite element analysis , volume =

    Rika Wright Carlsen and Alice Lux Fawzi and Yang Wan and Haneesh Kesari and Christian Franck , doi =. A quantitative relationship between rotational head kinematics and brain tissue strain from a 2-D parametric finite element analysis , volume =. Brain Multiphysics , keywords =

  38. [46]

    Gabler and J

    Taotao Wu and Fusako Sato and Jacobo Antona-Makoshi and Lee F. Gabler and J. Sebastian Giudice and Ahmed Alshareef and Masayuki Yaguchi and Mitsutoshi Masuda and Susan S. Margulies and Matthew B. Panzer , doi =. Integrating Human and Nonhuman Primate Data to Estimate Human Tol...

  39. [47]

    1998 , address =

    The Abbreviated Injury Scale-1990 Revision, Update 1998 , author =. 1998 , address =

    1990

  40. [48]

    2022 , doi =

    Instrumentation for Impact Test Part 1 - Electronic Instrumentation , type =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  41. [49]

    Road vehicles---anthropomorphic side impact dummy---lateral impact response requirements to assess the biofidelity of the dummy , institution =

  42. [50]

    Report to Congress on mild traumatic brain injury in the United States: steps to prevent a serious public health problem , institution =

  43. [51]

    Knutsen and Arnold D

    Andrew K. Knutsen and Arnold D. Gomez and Mihika Gangolli and Wen Tung Wang and Deva Chan and Yuan Chiao Lu and Eftychios Christoforou and Jerry L. Prince and Philip V. Bayly and John A. Butman and Dzung L. Pham , doi =. In vivo estimates of axonal stretch and 3D brain deforma...

  44. [52]

    OBJECTIVE RATING OF SIGNALS USING TEST AND SIMULATION RESPONSES , year =

    Christian Gehre and Heinrich Gades and Philipp Wernicke , address =. OBJECTIVE RATING OF SIGNALS USING TEST AND SIMULATION RESPONSES , year =. 21st International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles , month =

  45. [53]

    Human Brain Modeling with Its Anatomical Structure and Realistic Material Properties for Brain Injury Prediction , volume =

    Noritoshi Atsumi and Yuko Nakahira and Eiichi Tanaka and Masami Iwamoto , doi =. Human Brain Modeling with Its Anatomical Structure and Realistic Material Properties for Brain Injury Prediction , volume =. Annals of Biomedical Engineering , keywords =

  46. [54]

    2016 , Journal =

    Development of an Unbiased Validation Protocol to Assess the Biofidelity of Finite Element Head Models used in Prediction of Traumatic Brain Injury , Author =. 2016 , Journal =. doi:10.4271/2016-22-0013 , Volume =

    2016 doi

  47. [55]

    Giovanis and Ahmed Alshareef and Andrew K

    Kshitiz Upadhyay and Roshan Jagani and Dimitris G. Giovanis and Ahmed Alshareef and Andrew K. Knutsen and Curtis L. Johnson and Aaron Carass and Philip V. Bayly and Michael D. Shields and K. T. Ramesh , doi =. Effect of Human Head Shape on the Risk of Traumatic Brain Injury: A...

  48. [56]

    Begonia and Alexander M

    Mark T. Begonia and Alexander M. Knapp and R. K. Prabhu and Jun Liao and Lakiesha N. Williams , doi =. Shear-deformation based continuum-damage constitutive modeling of brain tissue , volume =. Journal of Biomechanics , keywords =

  49. [57]

    Noël and E

    L. Noël and E. Kuhl , doi =. Modeling neurodegeneration in chronic traumatic encephalopathy using gradient damage models , volume =. Computational Mechanics , keywords =

  50. [58]

    Pathophysiologic Responses to Rotational and Translational Accelerations of the Head , year =

    T A Gennarelli and L E Thibault and A K Ommaya , doi =. Pathophysiologic Responses to Rotational and Translational Accelerations of the Head , year =

  51. [59]

    Use of a Weighted-Impulse Criterion for Estimating Injury Hazard , type =

    Charles W Gadd , doi =. Use of a Weighted-Impulse Criterion for Estimating Injury Hazard , type =

  52. [60]

    Mechanism of Head Injury as Studied by the Cathode Ray Oscilloscope Preliminary Report , volume =

    E S Gurdjian and H R Lissner , issue =. Mechanism of Head Injury as Studied by the Cathode Ray Oscilloscope Preliminary Report , volume =. Journal of Neurosurgery , month =

  53. [61]

    Stresscoat

    E S Gurdjian and H R Lissner , issue =. Deformations of the Skull in Head Injury as Studied by the "Stresscoat" Technic , volume =. The American Journal of Surgery , month =

  54. [62]

    1943 , note =

    MECHANICS OF HEAD INJURIES , journal =. 1943 , note =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)87453-X , url =

    1943 doi

  55. [63]

    HEAD IMPACT SEVERITY MEASURES FOR EVALUATING MILD TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY RISK EXPOSURE , volume =

    Richard M Greenwald and Joseph T Gwin and Jeffrey J Chu and Joseph J Crisco , doi =. HEAD IMPACT SEVERITY MEASURES FOR EVALUATING MILD TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY RISK EXPOSURE , volume =. Neurosurgery , month =

  56. [64]

    A Review of the Severity Index , city =

    John Versace , doi =. A Review of the Severity Index , city =

  57. [65]

    A Proposed Tolerance Criterion for Diffuse Axonal Injury in Man , volume =

    Susan Sheps Margulies and Lawrence E Thibault , isbn =. A Proposed Tolerance Criterion for Diffuse Axonal Injury in Man , volume =. doi:10.1016/0021-9290(92)90231-o , journal =

    doi

  58. [66]

    Gurdjian, E. S. and Roberts, V. L. and Thomas, L. M. , title =. The Journal of Trauma , volume =. 1966 , month =

    1966

  59. [67]

    Eppinger and J Quinn Campbell and Rabih E Tannous and Erik D

    Erik G Takhounts and Rolf H. Eppinger and J Quinn Campbell and Rabih E Tannous and Erik D. Power and Lauren, S. Shook , doi =. On the Development of the SIMon Finite Element Head Model , volume =. Stapp Car Crash Journal , month =

  60. [68]

    Predictors for Traumatic Brain Injuries Evaluated through Accident Reconstructions , volume =

    Svein Kleiven , journal =. Predictors for Traumatic Brain Injuries Evaluated through Accident Reconstructions , volume =. doi:10.4271/2007-22-0003 , month =

    2007 doi

  61. [69]

    R. J.H. Cloots and J. A.W. Van Dommelen and T. Nyberg and S. Kleiven and M. G.D. Geers , doi =. Micromechanics of diffuse axonal injury: Influence of axonal orientation and anisotropy , volume =. Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology , keywords =

  62. [70]

    Giza and David A

    Christopher C. Giza and David A. Hovda , doi =. The new neurometabolic cascade of concussion , volume =. Neurosurgery , keywords =

  63. [71]

    Axonal Damage in Traumatic Brain Injury , volume =

    Douglas H Smith and David F Meaney , doi =. Axonal Damage in Traumatic Brain Injury , volume =. The Neuroscientist , month =

  64. [72]

    Region-Specific Tolerance Criteria for the Living Brain , volume =

    Benjamin S Elkin and Morrison, III, Barclay , journal =. Region-Specific Tolerance Criteria for the Living Brain , volume =. doi:10.4271/2007-22-0005 , keywords =

    2007 doi

  65. [73]

    Kraft and Marzieh Hajiaghamemar and Matthew B

    Songbai Ji and Mazdak Ghajari and Haojie Mao and Reuben H. Kraft and Marzieh Hajiaghamemar and Matthew B. Panzer and Remy Willinger and Michael D. Gilchrist and Svein Kleiven and Joel D. Stitzel , doi =. Use of Brain Biomechanical Models for Monitoring Impact Exposure in Conta...

  66. [74]

    Zuidema and Jeffrey J

    Taylor R. Zuidema and Jeffrey J. Bazarian and Kyle A. Kercher and Rebekah Mannix and Reuben H. Kraft and Sharlene D. Newman and Keisuke Ejima and Devin J. Rettke and Jonathan T. Macy and Jesse A. Steinfeldt and Keisuke Kawata , doi =. Longitudinal Associations of Clinical and ...

  67. [75]

    Nahum and Randall Smith and Carley C

    Alan M. Nahum and Randall Smith and Carley C. Ward , doi =. Intracranial Pressure Dynamics During Head Impact , type =

  68. [76]

    Fifty years of brain tissue mechanical testing: From in vitro to in vivo investigations , volume =

    Simon Chatelin and André Constantinesco and Rémy Willinger , doi =. Fifty years of brain tissue mechanical testing: From in vitro to in vivo investigations , volume =. Biorheology , keywords =

  69. [77]

    Finite Element Modeling of Direct Head Impact , year =

    Jesse Ruan and Tawfik B Khalil and Albert I King , booktitle =. Finite Element Modeling of Direct Head Impact , year =

  70. [78]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.4271/952714 , title =

    Chun Zhou and Tawfik B Khalil and Albert I King , booktitle =. doi:https://doi.org/10.4271/952714 , title =

    doi

  71. [79]

    , author=

    Investigation of Head Injury Mechanisms Using Neutral Density Technology and High-Speed Biplanar X-ray. , author=. Stapp car crash journal , year=

  72. [80]

    Constitutive Modeling of Brain Parenchyma Taking Account of Strain Rate Dependency with Anisotropy and Application to Brain Injury Analyses , volume =

    Noritoshi Atsumi and Yuko Nakahira and Masami Iwamoto and Satoko Hirabayashi and Eiichi Tanaka , doi =. Constitutive Modeling of Brain Parenchyma Taking Account of Strain Rate Dependency with Anisotropy and Application to Brain Injury Analyses , volume =. SAE Technical Papers ...

  73. [81]

    Visco-hyperelastic constitutive modeling of strain rate sensitive soft materials , volume =

    Kshitiz Upadhyay and Ghatu Subhash and Douglas Spearot , doi =. Visco-hyperelastic constitutive modeling of strain rate sensitive soft materials , volume =. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids , keywords =

  74. [82]

    Damage Models for Soft Tissues: A Survey , volume =

    Wenguang Li , doi =. Damage Models for Soft Tissues: A Survey , volume =. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering , keywords =

  75. [83]

    K. Y. Volokh , doi =. On modeling failure of rubber-like materials , volume =. Mechanics Research Communications , keywords =

  76. [84]

    and Garimella, Harsha T

    Gerber, Jesse I. and Garimella, Harsha T. and Kraft, Reuben H. , title =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  77. [85]

    Voyiadjis , doi =

    Wojciech Sumelka and George Z. Voyiadjis , doi =. A hyperelastic fractional damage material model with memory , volume =. International Journal of Solids and Structures , keywords =

  78. [86]

    Voyiadjis and Wojciech Sumelka , doi =

    George Z. Voyiadjis and Wojciech Sumelka , doi =. Brain modelling in the framework of anisotropic hyperelasticity with time fractional damage evolution governed by the Caputo-Almeida fractional derivative , volume =. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials ,...

  79. [87]

    Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) , howpublished =

  80. [88]

    TBI Data , howpublished =

  81. [89]

    Meaney and Barclay Morrison and Cameron Dale Bass , doi =

    David F. Meaney and Barclay Morrison and Cameron Dale Bass , doi =. The mechanics of traumatic brain injury: A review of what we know and what we need to know for reducing its societal burden , volume =. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering , month =

  82. [90]

    and Lamberty, G

    Brasure, M. and Lamberty, G. J. and Sayer, N. A. and others , title =. 2012 , month =

    2012

  83. [91]

    McKee and Thor D

    Ann C. McKee and Thor D. Stein and Christopher J. Nowinski and Robert A. Stern and Daniel H. Daneshvar and Victor E. Alvarez and Hyo Soon Lee and Garth Hall and Sydney M. Wojtowicz and Christine M. Baugh and David O. Riley and Caroline A. Kubilus and Kerry A. Cormier and Matth...

  84. [92]

    Saatman and Scott Fujimoto and Ramesh Raghupathi and David F

    Luca Longhi and Kathryn E. Saatman and Scott Fujimoto and Ramesh Raghupathi and David F. Meaney and Jason Davis and Asenia McMillan and Valeria Conte and Helmut L. Laurer and Sherman Stein and Nino Stocchetti and Tracy K. McIntosh , doi =. Temporal window of vulnerability to r...

  85. [93]

    Dynamic Response of the Human Head to Impact by Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis , volume =

    J S Ruan and T Khalil and A I King , doi =. Dynamic Response of the Human Head to Impact by Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis , volume =. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering , month =

  86. [94]

    Meaney and Douglas H

    David F. Meaney and Douglas H. Smith , doi =. Biomechanics of Concussion , volume =. Clinics in Sports Medicine , keywords =

  87. [95]

    Estimating Brain Injury Risk from Shipborne Underwater Blasts Using a High-fidelity Finite Element Head Model , volume =

    Sushan Nakarmi and Yaohui Wang and Alice Lux Fawzi and Christian Franck and Rika Wright Carlsen , doi =. Estimating Brain Injury Risk from Shipborne Underwater Blasts Using a High-fidelity Finite Element Head Model , volume =. Military Medicine , month =

  88. [96]

    Translational models of mild traumatic brain injury tissue biomechanics , volume =

    Xianghao Zhan and Anna Oeur and Yuzhe Liu and Michael M Zeineh and Gerald A Grant and Susan S Margulies and David B Camarillo , doi =. Translational models of mild traumatic brain injury tissue biomechanics , volume =. Current Opinion in Biomedical Engineering , month =

  89. [97]

    Margulies , doi =

    Marzieh Hajiaghamemar and Susan S. Margulies , doi =. Multi-Scale White Matter Tract Embedded Brain Finite Element Model Predicts the Location of Traumatic Diffuse Axonal Injury , volume =. Journal of Neurotrauma , keywords =

  90. [98]

    Directional Dependence of Axonal Brain Injury due to Centroidal and Non-Centroidal Acceleration , year =

    Thomas A Gennarelli and Lawrence E Thibault and G Tomei and R Wiser and D Graham and J Adams , address =. Directional Dependence of Axonal Brain Injury due to Centroidal and Non-Centroidal Acceleration , year =. 31st Stapp Car Crash Conference , month =. doi:https://doi.org/10...

    doi

  91. [99]

    Bayly and Ahmed Alshareef and Andrew K

    Philip V. Bayly and Ahmed Alshareef and Andrew K. Knutsen and Kshitiz Upadhyay and Ruth J. Okamoto and Aaron Carass and John A. Butman and Dzung L. Pham and Jerry L. Prince and K. T. Ramesh and Curtis L. Johnson , doi =. MR Imaging of Human Brain Mechanics In Vivo: New Measure...

  92. [100]

    and Upadhyay, Kshitiz , doi =

    Chandrashekar, Yogesh C. and Upadhyay, Kshitiz , doi =. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids , keywords =

  93. [101]

    M. C. LaPlaca and C. M. Simon and G. R. Prado and D. K. Cullen , doi =. CNS injury biomechanics and experimental models , volume =. Progress in Brain Research , keywords =

  94. [102]

    2019 , publisher=

    Introduction to Probability, Second Edition , author=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  95. [103]

    ON A FULLY THREE-DIMENSIONAL FINITE-STRAIN VISCOELASTIC DAMAGE MODEL: FORMULATION AND COMPUTATIONAL ASPECTS , volume =

    J C Simo , journal =. ON A FULLY THREE-DIMENSIONAL FINITE-STRAIN VISCOELASTIC DAMAGE MODEL: FORMULATION AND COMPUTATIONAL ASPECTS , volume =. doi:10.1016/0045-7825(87)90107-1 , pages =

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.