Sexual dimorphism of the dental tissues in human permanent mandibular canines and third premolars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods of measuring tissue area from images of longitudinal thin tooth sections have been used to assess sexual dimorphism in the permanent dentition. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the extent of sexual dimorphism within the coronal tissue proportions of permanent mandibular canines and premolars, using area measurements of the enamel and dentine-pulp core. The sample consisted of embedded "half-tooth" sections from 45 individuals, all of known age-at-death and sex, collected from the St. Thomas' Anglican Church historic (1821-1874) cemetery site in Belleville, ON, Canada. The relative dentine-pulp area of the third premolars and canines displayed high levels of sexual dimorphism, as well as statistically significant mean differences between the sexes. The male canines and premolars have significantly more dentine than their female counterparts, as well as relatively more dentine with respect to overall crown size. The female canines and premolars have significantly more enamel relative to overall crown area than those of the males. These results suggest that relative area measures of crown tissues are more predictable measures of sexual dimorphism than absolute measures, and tissue proportions may remain constant despite intrasex variation in overall tooth crown size.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".