Accuracy of Casts Fabricated by Digital and Conventional Implant Impressions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of stereolithographic casts (SCs) with those obtained using conventional implant impressions. An epoxy resin model containing dental implants was used as master model. Dental casts (n = 10) were fabricated through both conventional and digital implant impressions. The conventional casts (CCs), SCs, and the master model were digitized, and the accuracy was determined through a deviation analysis and linear measurements. Data were analyzed using paired Student t test with P < .05. The SCs showed higher deviation at the vestibular area (CC: 41 ± 28.87 μm; SC: 117 ± 36.83 μm) and lingual cusps (CC: 40.70 ± 19.79 μm; SC: 80 ± 42.95 μm) in comparison with CCs. No statistically significant difference was found for linear measurements of conventional and digital casts. The entire-arch accuracy was comparable between casts. However, SCs were less accurate at the cusp level in comparison with CCs.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".