The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A New Model Comparing Impact Responses of the Homogeneous and Inhomogeneous Human Brain
Abstract
A new three-dimensional human head finite element model, consisting of the scalp, skull, dura, falx, tentorium, pia, CSF, venous sinuses, ventricles, cerebrum (gray and white matter), cerebellum, brain stem and parasagittal bridging veins has been developed and partially validated against experimental data of Nahum et al (1977). A frontal impact and a sagittal plane rotational impact were simulated and impact responses from a homogeneous brain were compared with those of an inhomogeneous brain. Previous two-dimensional simulation results showed that differentiation between the gray and white matter and the inclusion of the ventricles are necessary in brain modeling to match regions of high shear stress to locations of diffuse axonal injury (DAI). The three-dimensional simulation results presented here also showed the necessity of including these anatomical features in brain modeling. Although both the homogeneous and inhomogeneous brain models predicted almost the same intracranial pressure response of the brain, they predicted a different shear stress response. Simulation results suggest that coup/contrecoup injures are pressure induced, while brain-stem injuries are caused by shear stress/strain. Furthermore, shear strains at the genu of the corpus callosum can be a predictor of DAI. The impact response of parasagittal bridging veins, simulated by using one-dimensional string element, appeared to be reasonable and consistent with experimental results. The model predicted that the bridging veins in the central part of the superior sagittal sinus were at higher risk of rupture as they could be subjected to higher tensile strains during the rebound phase. This could be an important injury mechanism for subdural hematoma which also depends on the direction of impact.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A Proposed Injury Threshold for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
Zhang, L., Yang, K. H., & King, A. I. (2004) · Journal of Biomechanical Engineering · doi:10.1115/1.1691446 · Cited by 939
Self-citationCloots, R. J. H., Gervaise, H. M. T., van Dommelen, J. A. W., & Geers, M. G. D. (2008) · Annals of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10439-008-9510-3 · Cited by 151
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhou, C., Khalil, T. B., & King, A. I.
- Venue
- SAE Technical Paper Series
- Publisher
- SAE International
- Published
- 1995-11-01
- Volume
- 1
- ISSN
- 0148-7191 (ISSN-L)
- 2688-3627
- OpenAlex
- W1602668371
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.48
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A New Model Comparing Impact Responses of the Homogeneous and Inhomogeneous Human Brain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4271/952714
- The paper
- Zhou, C., Khalil, T. B., & King, A. I. (1995). A New Model Comparing Impact Responses of the Homogeneous and Inhomogeneous Human Brain. SAE Technical Paper Series. https://doi.org/10.4271/952714
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.