Toward subject-specific evaluation: methods of evaluating finite element brain models using experimental high-rate rotational brain motion.

Computational models of the brain have become the gold standard in biomechanics to understand, predict, and mitigate traumatic brain injuries. Many models have been created and evaluated with limited experimental data and without accounting for subject-specific morphometry of the specimens in the dataset. Recent advancements in the measurement of brain motion using sonomicrometry allow for a comprehensive evaluation of brain model biofidelity using a high-rate, rotational brain motion dataset. In this study, four methods were used to determine the best technique to compare nodal displacement to experimental brain motion, including a new morphing method to match subject-specific inner skull geometry. Three finite element brain models were evaluated in this study: the isotropic GHBMC and SIMon models, as well as an anisotropic model with explicitly embedded axons (UVA-EAM). Using a weighted cross-correlation score (between 0 and 1), the anisotropic model yielded the highest average scores across specimens and loading conditions ranging from 0.53 to 0.63, followed by the isotropic GHBMC with average scores ranging from 0.46 to 0.58, and then the SIMon model with average scores ranging from 0.36 to 0.51. The choice of comparison method did not significantly affect the cross-correlation score, and differences of global strain up to 0.1 were found for the morphed geometry relative to baseline models. The morphed or scaled geometry is recommended when evaluating computational brain models to capture the subject-specific skull geometry of the experimental specimens.