Fatigue and nanomechanical properties of K3<scp>XF</scp> nickel‐titanium instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To examine the fatigue behaviour of heat-treated NiTi instruments when immersed in aqueous media and to determine the effect of cyclic fatigue on the hardness and elastic modulus of NiTi instruments using a nanoindentation technique. METHODOLOGY: K3XF and K3 NiTi instruments, both in sizes 25, 0.04 taper and 40, 0.04 taper, were subjected to rotational bending at a curvature of 42° either in air or under deionized water, and the number of revolutions to fracture (Nf ) was recorded. The fracture surface of all fragments was examined with a scanning electron microscope. The hardness and elastic modulus of the fracture surface of instruments sized 25, 0.04 taper were then measured using a nanoindentation test. RESULTS: The K3XF instruments had a fatigue resistance superior to K3 instruments under dry and aqueous environments (P < 0.05). The fatigue life of K3 instruments was similar under both conditions, whereas the Nf of K3XF was greater under water than in air, especially at the size 40, 0.04 taper (P < 0.05). The values for the fraction of the area occupied by the dimple region were significantly smaller in K3XF instruments than in K3 instruments, especially under water (P < 0.05). There was no difference in hardness on K3XF instruments between new files and instruments subjected to the fatigue process. The hardness of instruments subjected to the fatigue process was significantly lower in K3XF than in K3 instruments (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The fatigue life of K3XF instruments under water is longer than it is for K3XF instruments in air. There was no work-hardening effect on K3XF instruments subjected to the fatigue process.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".