MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029195285 · doi:10.1177/0022034514553976

Resin-composite Blocks for Dental CAD/CAM Applications

2014· review· en· W2029195285 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Research · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCADDental ceramicsImpressionMachinabilityMaterials scienceCeramicComputer-aided manufacturingComposite numberDentistryComputer scienceComposite materialEngineering drawingMachiningEngineeringMedicineMetallurgyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in digital impression technology and manufacturing processes have led to a dramatic paradigm shift in dentistry and to the widespread use of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) in the fabrication of indirect dental restorations. Research and development in materials suitable for CAD/CAM applications are currently the most active field in dental materials. Two classes of materials are used in the production of CAD/CAM restorations: glass-ceramics/ceramics and resin composites. While glass-ceramics/ceramics have overall superior mechanical and esthetic properties, resin-composite materials may offer significant advantages related to their machinability and intra-oral reparability. This review summarizes recent developments in resin-composite materials for CAD/CAM applications, focusing on both commercial and experimental materials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.364 · 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