Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The ballistic insert plate–gelatin configuration is a hard–soft coupled terminal-ballistic system for evaluating perforation resistance and post-perforation residual threat, but reliable prediction remains difficult because real ballistic tests are costly, sparse, and limited in test conditions. Objective: This study aims to develop a physics-guided small-sample modelling framework for jointly characterizing perforation probability, mass-dependent 50% perforation velocity, and residual velocity in tungsten-alloy fragment impact tests. Methods: Based on 21 impact tests, including 11 perforation cases, a continuous-mass logistic model was established to describe perforation probability as a function of impact velocity and projectile mass. The estimated mass-dependent 50% perforation velocity was used as the threshold anchor of a physics-based residual-velocity backbone, and four residual-learning models were introduced to correct the remaining prediction error. Their outputs were integrated using a reliability-gated ensemble determined by leave-one-out cross-validation errors. Results: The continuous-mass formulation enabled information sharing between two neighboring projectile-mass groups of approximately 3.5 g and 4.1 g. With feasible-domain constraints, the fitted backbone parameters were 3.912 and 0.663. For the present dataset, the integrated model achieved a root mean square error of approximately 31 m/s and a coefficient of determination of approximately 0.60, while physics-constrained data augmentation was used only for training regularization. Conclusions: The proposed framework provides an interpretable and experimentally constrained approach for small-sample insert–gelatin ballistic data, although broader validation with additional projectile masses, insert materials, gelatin conditions, and impact velocities is still required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zheng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: