MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139464072 · doi:10.1111/jace.13491

Chelate Bonding Mechanism in a Novel Magnesium Phosphate Bone Cement

2015· article· en· W2139464072 on OpenAlexaff
Theresa Christel, Susanne Christ, Jake E. Barralet, Jürgen Gröll, Uwe Gbureck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Ceramic Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChelationCementMagnesium phosphateDissolutionPrecipitationMagnesiumCementitiousPhosphateCompressive strengthPhytic acidChemistryNuclear chemistryRaw materialMaterials scienceChemical engineeringInorganic chemistryMetallurgyComposite materialOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel approach to harden magnesium phosphate cements was tested using phytic acid (C 6 H 18 O 24 P 6 ) solutions as chelation agent. In addition to complex formation, a cementitious dissolution and precipitation reaction led to the formation of newberyite (Mg HPO 4 ·3H 2 O) as the hydrated form of the farringtonite [Mg 3 ( PO 4 ) 2 ] raw powder. The set cements showed good mechanical properties (up to 65 MPa in compression) displaying a doubling of the compressive strength of conventional newberyite forming cements despite of a significantly lower degree of cement conversion. An increasing phytic acid concentration from 10% to 30% had a retarding effect on the setting time (11–16 min), decreased the pH close to acidic conditions ( pH = 5–4) and increased the maximum setting temperature (26°C–31°C), but none of these factors reached critical values. The presented strategy was successful in fabricating a good workable, novel mineral biocement with promising characteristics for biomedical applications.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations35
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Ceramic SocietySame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207