MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dental diagnostic clinical instrument ("Canary") development using photothermal radiometry and modulated luminescence

2010· article· en· W2141053174 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raymond J. Jeon, Koneswaran Sivagurunathan, José Ángel García García, Anna Matvienko, Andreas Mandelis, Stephen H. Abrams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsXanadu Quantum Technologies (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsUSBRadiometrySIGNAL (programming language)Materials scienceDetectorComputer scienceSoftwarePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1999, our group at the CADIFT, University of Toronto, has developed the application of Frequency Domain Photothermal Radiometry (PTR) and Luminescence (LUM) to dental caries detection. Various cases including artificial caries detection have been studied and some of the inherent advantages of the adaptation of this technique to dental diagnostics in conjunction with modulated luminescence as a dual-probe technique have been reported. Based on these studies, a portable, compact diagnostic instrument for dental clinic use has been designed, assembled and tested. A semiconductor laser, optical fibers, a thermoelectric cooled mid-IR detector, and a USB connected data acquisition card were used. Software lock-in amplifier techniques were developed to compute amplitude and phase of PTR and LUM signals. In order to achieve fast measurement and acceptable signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for clinical application, swept sine waveforms were used. As a result sampling and stabilization time for each measurement point was reduced to a few seconds. A sophisticated software interface was designed to simultaneously record intra-oral camera images with PTR and LUM responses. Preliminary results using this instrument during clinical trials in a dental clinic showed this instrument could detect early caries both from PTR and LUM signals.

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)0.000
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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207