Biomineralization and Biomaterial Considerations in Dentin Remineralization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Dentin is a composite hard tissue, comprising of inorganic and organic matrices, and regulated by many proteins during development. The demineralization of dentin results from the loss of inorganic matrix [mainly hydroxyapatite (HAP)], but the organic matrix (mainly type I collagen) will sustain for a period of time after demineralization. Over the past decade, there has been a growing interest on the remineralization of demineralized dentin, primarily in connection with minimally invasive caries management. More and more biomaterials and methods are currently being evaluated to achieve newer approaches for the remineralization of demineralized dentin. These strategies are mostly based on biomimetic approaches and aim to achieve the characteristics of natural hard tissue. This article will present a complete review on the basic compositions and properties of dentin, which formed the basis for the biomimetic remineralization of demineralized dentin. How to cite this article Zhang X, Xiao Z, Wang H, Kishen A. Biomineralization and Biomaterial Considerations in Dentin Remineralization. J Oper Dent Endod 2016;1(1):7-12.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".