Biomedical Ti–Mo Alloys with Surface Machined and Modified by Laser Beam: Biomechanical, Histological, and Histometric Analysis in Rabbits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In vivo bone response was assessed by removal torque, hystological and histometrical analysis on a recently developed biomedical Ti-15Mo alloy, after surface modification by laser beam irradiation, installed in the tibia of rabbits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 32 wide cylindrical Ti-15Mo dental implants were obtained (10mm × 3.75mm). The implants were divided into two groups: 1) control samples (Machined surface - MS) and 2) implants with their surface modified by Laser beam-irradiation (Test samples - LS). Six implants of each surface were used for removal torque test and 10 of each surface for histological and histometrical analysis. The implants were placed in the tibial metaphyses of rabbits. RESULTS: Average removal torque was 51.5Ncm to MS and >90Ncm to LS. Bone-to-implant-contact percentage was significantly higher for LS implants both in the cortical and marrow regions. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that laser treated Ti-15Mo alloys are promising materials for biomedical application.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".