MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208292106 · doi:10.3390/nano11112800

Renewable Carbon Nanomaterials: Novel Resources for Dental Tissue Engineering

2021· review· en· W3208292106 on OpenAlexaff
Seyyed Mojtaba Mousavi, Khadije Yousefi, Seyyed Alireza Hashemi, Marzie Afsa, Sonia Bahrani, Ahmad Gholami, Yasamin Ghahramani, Ali Akbar Alizadeh, Wei‐Hung Chiang

Bibliographic record

VenueNanomaterials · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGraphene and Nanomaterials Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrapheneCarbon nanotubeNanotechnologyMaterials scienceNanomaterialsTissue engineeringBiomedical engineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dental tissue engineering (TE) is undergoing significant modifications in dental treatments. TE is based on a triad of stem cells, signaling molecules, and scaffolds that must be understood and calibrated with particular attention to specific dental sectors. Renewable and eco-friendly carbon-based nanomaterials (CBMs), including graphene (G), graphene oxide (GO), reduced graphene oxide (rGO), graphene quantum dots (GQD), carbon nanotube (CNT), MXenes and carbide, have extraordinary physical, chemical, and biological properties. In addition to having high surface area and mechanical strength, CBMs have greatly influenced dental and biomedical applications. The current study aims to explore the application of CBMs for dental tissue engineering. CBMs are generally shown to have remarkable properties, due to various functional groups that make them ideal materials for biomedical applications, such as dental tissue engineering.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanomaterialsSame topicGraphene and Nanomaterials ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207