The solid particle erosion behaviour of dental enamel using a novel air abrasion system
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The erosion rate of the enamel of human premolars, molars and canines was measured at various angles of attack using a dental air abrasion unit equipped with a novel particle containment system consisting of a conical water spray surrounding the central air/particle jet. This water curtain minimised the amount of airborne abrasive particles and erosion debris. No statistically significant difference in erosion rate was found between samples blasted with or without the particle containment system. The dental enamel was found to behave in a brittle erosive manner, exhibiting a maximum in erosion rate with the abrasive jet oriented perpendicular to the surface. The observed dependency of erosion rate on the type of tooth could be explained on the basis of differing hardness. Artificial dental block samples showed significantly lower erosion rates compared to human dental enamel, implying that they are not suitable for simulating the solid particle erosion behaviour of teeth.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 it