MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107997423 · doi:10.1117/1.3158994

Optical approach to the salivary pellicle

2009· article· en· W2107997423 on OpenAlexaff
Jae Ho Baek, Tatiana B. Krasieva, Shuo Tang, Yeh‐Chan Ahn, Chang Soo Kim, Diana Vu, Zhongping Chen, Petra Wilder‐Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNational Center for Research ResourcesGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographySalivaEnamel paintMicroscopyMaterials scienceOpticsBiomedical engineeringChemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The salivary pellicle plays an important role in oral physiology, yet noninvasive in situ characterization and mapping of this layer remains elusive. The goal of this study is to develop an optical approach for the real-time, noninvasive mapping and characterization of salivary pellicles using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and optical coherence microscopy (OCM). The long-term goals are to improve diagnostic capabilities in the oral cavity, gain a better understanding of physiological and pathological processes related to the oral hard tissues, and monitor treatment responses. A salivary pellicle is incubated on small enamel cubes using human whole saliva. OCT and OCM imaging occurs at 0, 10, 30, 60 min, and 24 h. For some imaging, spherical gold nanoparticles (15 nm) are added to determine whether this would increase the optical signal from the pellicle. Multiphoton microscopy (MPM) provides the baseline information. In the saliva-incubated samples, a surface signal from the developing pellicle is visible in OCT images. Pellicle "islands" form, which increase in complexity over time until they merge to form a continuous layer over the enamel surface. Noninvasive, in situ time-based pellicle formation on the enamel surface is visualized and characterized using optical imaging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207