# A Review of Validation Methods for the Intracranial Response of FEHM to Blunt Impacts
## 3 Prominent FEHM and Their Validation  
### Empirical Data Applied to FEHM Validation  
Among existing FEHM, the most commonly used validation criteria are the intracranial pressure (ICP) response against data from [PERSON] et al. [34] and [PERSON] et al. [38], and the relative displacement of the brain within the skull, compared to that observed and reported by [PERSON] et al. [35, 36]. The individual impact cases taken from these established sources and applied to prominent FEHM are summarised in Table 4, with pointers to any further works employed to judge the intracranial performance of the FEHM. The FEHM listed in Table 4 have either been validated against multiple sources, been included in other FEHM review works, including [5, 6, 7], or used in research efforts beyond the initial validation/research group. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l} \hline \hline  & & & & & & & \\ \hline
**Name** & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON] et al. [35]** & **[PERSON] et al. [36]** & **Other** & **References** \\ \hline WSUBIM & \(36,37,38\), & MS428-2 & C291-T1, C383-T1 & & & [72, 73] \\  & \(43,44,54\) & & & & & \\ UCDBTM V1.0 & \(37\) & MS428-2 & C383-T4 & & & [21, 74] \\ KTH & \(37\) & MS428-2 & C291-T1, C383-T1, & & & [47] \\  & & & & C755-T2 & & \\ KTH-voxel & & & & C755-T2 & & [75] \\ SIMon & \(37\) & MS428-2 & C291-T1, C383-T1, & & & [76] \\  & & & & C755-T2 & & \\ DSSM\({}^{1}\) & & & & & C288-T1, C380-T5 & [77] \\ GHBMC V1.0 & \(36,37,38\), & MS428-2 & C383-T3, C755-T2 & C241-T1,T6, & [37] \({}^{1}\) & [44] \\  & & & & C380-T3,T4,T5, & & \\  & & & & C393-T4 & & \\ Nanjing & \(37\) & MS428-2 & C383-T1 & & & [18, 78] \\ SUFEHM & \(37\) & MS428-2 & C383-T1,T3,T4 & C288-T1,T2, & & [79, 80] \\  & & & & C755-T2,T3,T5 & C380-T2,T3,T5 & & \\ Manhattan & & & & & [54] \({}^{2}\) & [57, 58] \\ WHIM \({}^{*}\) & \(37\) & MS428-2 & C383-T1, C755-T2 & C393-T4 & [53] \({}^{2}\) & [56, 81] \\ THUMS & \(37\) & MS428-2 & C291-T1, C383-T1, & & & [25] \\  & & & & C755-T2 & & \\ Pennsylvania & \(37\) & & & & C383-T1, C755-T2 & C393-T4 & & [82] \\ ABM & & & & C291-T1, C383-T1, & & & [83] \\  & & & & C755-T2 & & \\ Imperial & & & & & & [84] \\ Tokyo & & & & & C755-T2, C383-T1 & & [85] \\ YEAHM & \(37\) & & & & & [86] \\ aHead & & & & C755-T2 & & & [87] \\ Hyderabad & \(37\) & MS428-2 & & & & [88] \\ GHBMC V2.0 & & & & & C291-T1, C755-T2, & [40] & [50] \\  & & & & C383-T1,T3,T4 & & & [89] \\ Malaysia & \(37\) & & & & & [90] \\ UCDBTM V2.0 & & & & C755-T2 & C380-T5 & & [91] \\ Adapt & \(37\) & & & & C288-T3, & & [91] \\  & & & & & C380-T1,T2,T3,T4,T6, & & \\  & & & & & C393-T3 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\) The Worcester Head Injury Model (WHIM) has previously been referred to as Dartmouth Head Injury Model (DHIM), including in the papers depicting its development and validation. However, Ji Lab [92] and associated publications now use the Worcester name. \({}^{1}\) Dartmouth Subject Specific Model. \({}^{1}\) Brain confusion vs cadavers (as discussed in Section 2.1.1). \({}^{2}\) In vivo measurement of brain displacement and deformation through tagged MRI (Section 2.2.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: A summary of the experimental procedures used to validate the intracranial response of existing Finite Element Head Models (FEHM), with reference to the papers detailing the procedures and performance. Where models do not have a published or generally used name, the location of the institute of the lead author(s) has been used to identify the FEHM. The FEHM are displayed in chronological order, according to the date of their initial validation publication. As the technology to create FEHM has become more established and accessible, researchers have begun to create in-house models designed/customised for specific investigations and applications. Often models are developed to investigate the influence of particular impact conditions, such as location [93; 94], or the presence/properties of protection [94; 95; 96; 97; 98].