Anomalous mandibular premolars: a mandibular first premolar with three roots and a mandibular second premolar with a C‐shaped canal 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
AIM: To describe unusual variations in the root morphology and root canal systems of mandibular first and second premolar teeth extracted for orthodontic reasons. SUMMARY: Normally mandibular first and second premolar teeth have single roots with single canals. A 15-year-old patient presented for orthodontic treatment and two mandibular premolar teeth were examined post-extraction. The mandibular first premolar exhibited three distinct, separate roots and the mandibular second premolar exhibited a C-shaped root canal system. The coronal morphology of each of the mandibular premolars revealed dimensions and anatomy within normal limits. The incidence of a three-rooted mandibular first premolar is approximately 0.2%. KEY LEARNING POINTS: * Thorough clinical and radiographic interpretation is important in recognizing anomalous root and root canal systems. * The most common forms of root and canal systems and its aberrations must be understood to realize variations from normal do occur. * Successful root canal treatment requires an accurate diagnosis of the root canal system using all available aids. * Value of microcomputed tomography in the study of anatomy ex vivo and cone-beam tomography in clinical endodontics of complex premolar cases is increasing.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it