Digitization of dental alginate impression: Three-dimensional evaluation of point cloud
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the digitization of alginate impressions by analyzing differences between the scan data of two types of impressions (alginate and rubber) taken from the master die and the scan data for the master die. The master die and impressions were digitized using a dental laser scanner (7 series, Dental Wings, Montreal, Canada). The crown portion of the abutment teeth in the digital data of 20 impressions was divided into three regions: cervical surface, middle surface, and occlusal surface. An independent t-test showed a significant difference (p<0.05) in the mean difference for each experimental group (alginate and rubber). One-way ANOVA and Tukey's honest significant difference test revealed a significant difference (p<0.05) among the three regions in the rubber impression. The results of this study also carefully suggest the possibility of digitization of alginate impressions in the future.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 it