Estimating Mineral Changes in Enamel Formation by Ashing/BSE and MicroCT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enamel formation produces the most highly mineralized tissue in the human body. The growth of enamel crystallites is assisted by enamel proteins and proteinases. As enamel formation progresses from secretory to maturation stages, the composition of the matrix with its mineral and non-mineral components dynamically changes in an inverse fashion. We hypothesized that appropriately calibrated micro-computed tomography (µCT) technology is suitable to estimate the mineral content (weight and/or density) and volume comparable in accuracy with that for directly weighed and sectioned enamel. Different sets of mouse mandibular incisors of C57BL/6 mice were used for dissections and µCT reconstructions. Calibration phantoms corresponding to the range of enamel mineral densities were used. Secretory-stage enamel contained little mineral and was consequently too poor in contrast for enamel volumes to be accurately estimated by µCT. Maturation-stage enamel, however, showed remarkable correspondence for total mineral content per volume where comparisons were possible between and among the different analytical techniques used. The main advantages of the µCT approach are that it is non-destructive, time-efficient, and can monitor changes in mineral content of the most mature enamel, which is too physically hard to dissect away from the tooth.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".