Ablation Precision and Thermal Effects of a Picosecond Infrared Laser (PIRL) on Roots of Human Teeth: A Pilot Study <i>Ex Vivo</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Picosecond infrared laser (PIRL) was investigated regarding its possible therapeutic application in cutting dental roots. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Extracted human teeth were processed in the root area by laser ablations followed by histological evaluation. Dentin adjacent to the cutting surface was evaluated morphometrically. RESULTS: PIRL produced clearly defined cutting boundaries in dental roots. At the bottom of the cavity, the ablation surface became slightly concave. Heat development in this scantly hydrated tissue was considerable. We attributed the excess heating effects to heat accumulation due to multiple pulse overlap across a limited scan range imposed by tooth geometries. CONCLUSION: Defined areas of the tooth root may be treated using the PIRL. For clinical translation, it would be necessary to improve beam delivery to facilitate beam steering for the intended oral application (e.g. by using a fiber) and identify optimal repetition rates/scan speeds combined with cooling techniques to minimize accumulated heat within ablation cavities.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".