The evaluation of physical properties of a polyurethane expandable endodontic sealer: a preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endodontic sealers play a vital role in providing 3-dimensional (3D) filling of complex root canal system (RCS). This study intended to compare the physical properties of a Polyurethane Expandable Sealer (PES), AH Plus and EndoSequence. Three properties including setting time, radiopacity and flow (rheology) were evaluated based on ISO 6876 standard. For evaluation of each of these physical properties, five samples from experimental groups: AH Plus, EndoSequence, PES (controlled expansion) and PES (high expansion) were used (n = 5). Data were analysed by one-way ANOVA and Post Hoc Tukey tests (a = 0.05). EndoSequence showed the longest setting time (P < 0.000); AH Plus showed that highest radiopacity (P < 0.000); and PES (high expansion) showed the highest flow (diameter and surface area) (P < 0.000). EndoSequence and PES (controlled expansion) showed promising and comparable physical properties to the AH Plus sealer in terms of flow, setting time and radiopacity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".