MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155498659 · doi:10.1177/0022034513511972

High-temperature-pressure Polymerized Resin-infiltrated Ceramic Networks

2013· article· en· W2155498659 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐François Nguyen, N. Dorin Ruse, Anh Chi Phan, Michaël Sadoun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerizationCeramicMaterials scienceComposite materialPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to produce composite blocks (CB) for CAD/CAM applications by high-temperature-pressure (HT/HP) polymerization of resin-infiltrated glass-ceramic networks. The effect of network sintering and the absence/presence of initiator was investigated. Mechanical properties were determined and compared with those of Paradigm MZ100 (3M ESPE) blocks and HT/HP polymerized experimental "classic" CB, in which the filler had been incorporated by conventional mixing. The networks were made from glass-ceramic powder (VITA Zahnfabrik) formed by slip casting and were either sintered or not. They were silanized, infiltrated by urethane dimethacrylate, with or without initiator, and polymerized under HT/HP (300 MPa, 180°C) to obtain resin-infiltrated glass-ceramic network (RIGCN) CB. HT/HP polymerized CB were also made from an experimental "classic" composite. Flexural strength (σf), fracture toughness (KIC), and Vickers hardness were determined and analyzed by one- or two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Scheffé multiple-means comparisons (α = 0.05), and Weibull statistics (for σf). Fractured surfaces were characterized with scanning electron microscopy. The mechanical properties of RIGCN CB were significantly higher. Sintering induced significant increases in σf and hardness, while the initiator significantly decreased hardness. The results suggested that RIGCN and HT/HP polymerization could be used to obtain CB with superior mechanical properties, suitable for CAD/CAM 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 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)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations127
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dental ResearchSame topicDental materials and restorationsFrench-language works237,207