MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Irradiance Differences in the Violet (405 nm) and Blue (460 nm) Spectral Ranges among Dental Light‐Curing Units

2010· article· en· W1507252679 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Bengt Price, D. Labrie, Frederick A. Rueggeberg, Christopher M Felix

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLaser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrradianceOpticsMaterials scienceSpectroradiometerWavelengthLight-emitting diodeSpectral power distributionOptoelectronicsPhysicsReflectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Problem: Previous studies identified nonuniformity in the irradiance at the tip end of a variety of dental light‐curing units (LCUs) and correlated those differences with potential clinical implications, but the spectral dependence of the irradiance uniformity has not yet been addressed. Purpose: This study examined the irradiance uniformity across emitting tips of LCUs at two emission wavelengths, 405 and 460 nm. Two broadband emission light units (quartz‐tungsten‐halogen [QTH] and plasma arc [PAC]), and four commercial light‐emitting diode (LED)‐type LCUs were examined. Materials and Methods: The spectral radiant power from six LCUs was measured using a laboratory grade spectroradiometer (Ocean Optics, Dunedin, FL, USA). The spatial and spectral characteristics of irradiance across the emitting tips of these light units were recorded through 10‐nm wide bandpass filters (centered at 405 nm [violet] or 460 nm [blue]) using a laser beam analyzer (Ophir‐Spiricon, Logan, UT, USA). Irradiance distributions were reported using two‐dimensional contour and three‐dimensional isometric color‐coded images. Irradiance uniformity at the tip end was determined using the Top Hat Factor (THF) for each filtered wavelength. Results: Irradiance distributions from the QTH and PAC units were uniformly distributed across the tip end of the light guide, and THF values, measured through the 405 and 460‐nm filters, were not significantly different. However, the three polywave LED units delivered non‐uniform irradiance distributions with THF values differing significantly between the 405 and 460‐nm emission wavelengths for each unit. Areas of nonuniformity were attributed to the locations of the various types of LED chips within the LCUs. Conclusion: All three polywave LED units delivered a nonuniform irradiance distribution across their emitting tip ends at the two important emission wavelengths of 405 nm and 460 nm, whereas the broadband light sources (QTH and PAC) showed no evidence of spectral inhomogeneity at these wavelengths. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Since the rate and extent of polymerization of photo activated restorative materials is highly dependent on delivering radiant energy at specific wavelengths, the nonuniform spectral distribution across the emitting tips of polywave light‐emitting diode curing lights may affect the resulting properties of some photocured resins and their potential for long‐term clinical success. (J Esthet Restor Dent 22:363–378, 2010)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Esthetic and Restorative DentistrySame topicLaser Applications in Dentistry and MedicineFrench-language works237,207