Analysis of the process parameters affecting the bone burring process: An in‐vitro porcine study
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
BACKGROUND: A stable bone burring process, which avoids thermal osteonecrosis and minimizes harmful vibrations, is important for certain orthopedic surgical procedures, and especially relevant to robot-operated bone burring systems. METHODS: An experimental characterization of the effects of several bone burring process parameters was performed. Burring parameters were evaluated by resultant bone temperature, tool vibration, and burring force. RESULTS: An optimal combination of bone burring parameters produced minimums in both bone temperature (<40°C) and tool vibration (<4 g-rms). A cylindrical burr, oriented normal to the specimen, resulted in significantly higher temperatures (50.8 ± 6.8°C) compared with a spherical burr (33.5 ± 4.3°C) (P = .008). Regardless of the parameters tested, burring forces were less than 10 N. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended configuration, which minimized both bone temperature and vibrations experimentally, was a 6-mm spherical burr at 15 000 rpm with a 2 mm/s feed rate.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it