Association between near occlusal contact areas and mixing ability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the relationship between occlusal contact and near contact areas defined by clenching intensity using electromyograms (EMGs) and mixing ability assessed with colour-changeable chewing gum. Participants comprised 44 dentate adults (24 men, 20 women) with a mean age of 28·2 ± 6·8 years. Silicone material was used to measure the occlusal contact and near contact areas (the area of each type of tooth, the total area of the first molar and second molar, the second premolar to the second molar and the first premolar to the second molar) defined by clenching intensity at 10% maximum voluntary contraction (MVC). Colour-changeable chewing gum was used to assess mixing ability. A colorimeter was used to measure colour changes, and the calculated colour difference (ΔE) was used as a measure of mixing ability. Correlation analysis of ΔE and occlusal contact and near contact areas revealed a significant positive correlation of 0·47 at 0-160 μm thicknesses of the silicone registration material of the second molar (P < 0·01). The near contact area with a thickness up to 200 μm was correlated with mixing ability, with the correlation strengthening as the interocclusal distance increased up to 160 μm. Notably, occlusal contact and near contact areas of the second molar were strongly correlated with mixing ability in dentate adults.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".