MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1549442237 · doi:10.1002/jbm.b.33242

Degradation behavior of biodegradable Fe35Mn alloy stents

2014· article· en· W1549442237 on OpenAlexaff
N. B. Sing, Afghany Mostavan, Esah Hamzah, Diego Mantovani, Hendra Hermawan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B Applied Biomaterials · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia
KeywordsMaterials scienceStentDegradation (telecommunications)AlloyDielectric spectroscopyComposite materialPorosityFabricationElectrochemistrySurgeryMedicineChemistryElectrodeElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports a degradation study that was done on stent prototypes made of biodegradable Fe35Mn alloy in a simulated human coronary arterial condition. The stent degradation was observed for a short-term period from 0.5 to 168 h, which simulates the early period of stenting procedure. Potentiodynamic polarization and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy were used to quantify degradation rate and surface property of the stents. Results showed that signs of degradation were visible on both crimped and expanded stents after 1 h of test, mostly located on the stent's curvatures. The degradation rate of stent was higher compared to that of the original alloy, indicating the surface altering effect of stent fabrication processing to degradation. A single oxide layer was formed and detected as a porous structure with capacitive behavior. Expanded stents exhibited lower polarization resistance compared to the nonexpanded ones, indicating the cold work effect of expansion procedure to degradation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.001

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B Applied BiomaterialsSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207