MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2208297264 · doi:10.1088/2057-1976/1/4/045007

A novel additive manufacturing-based technique for developing bio-structures with conformal channels and encapsulated voids

2015· article· en· W2208297264 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmad Basalah, Shahrzad Esmaeili, Ehsan Toyserkani

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Physics & Engineering Express · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUmm Al-Qura UniversitySaudi Arabian Cultural Bureau
Keywords3D printingMaterials scienceRapid prototypingPorosityBiomedical engineeringBone structureImplantCortical boneNanotechnologyComputer scienceComposite materialEngineeringAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel additive manufacturing-based technique for developing bio-structures with conformal channels and encapsulated voids. The network of macro-channels in the structure of cortical bone is crucial, particularly for nutrition. Therefore, a successful bone implant should simulate the real bone architecture by including such channels in its structure. The introduction of additive manufacturing (AM) techniques in the orthopedic implant industry brings the potential of producing customized bone implants that mimic the structure of real bone. However, the depowdering issue in the powder bed AM technique has hindered the creation of macro-sized channels in bone implants composed of biocompatible materials. In this study, we introduce a new method for manufacturing implants which is composed of titanium and includes networks of channels. This technique is primarily based on printing individual components of a sliced structure, followed by depowdering and assembling the components before the sintering process. This new technique has the potential to control the internal features of 3D printed structures. A set of comparative physical and mechanical tests were conducted to characterize the resulting structures. Experimental characterization results showed that the shear strength of the sample that was made by the new technique was reduced by 24%–30%, where the porosity was slightly lower (~2%) than that of a comparable control sample. However, the new technique had no effect on the compressive strength of the structure.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Physics & Engineering ExpressSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207