Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the influence of ceramic surface conditioning and storage regimen (baseline vs. aging) on the fatigue performance of simplified lithium disilicate glass-ceramic restorations. A total of 90 ceramic discs (Ø= 10 mm; thickness= 1.0 mm) were allocated into 6 groups (n= 15), considering 2 factors: "ceramic surface treatment" - CA (only silane-based coupling agent, Monobond N), HF (5% hydrofluoric acid etching), or HF+CA (5% HF acid etching plus silane-based coupling agent); and "storage regimen" - baseline (24 hours - 5 days of distilled water at 37 °C), or long-term aging (180 days of distilled water at 37 °C + 25,000 thermal cycles). After intaglio ceramic conditioning, adhesive bonding (Multilink N) was performed onto epoxy resin discs (Ø= 10 mm; thickness= 2.5 mm) and the bonded sets were subjected to step-stress fatigue tests (initial load: 200 N; step-size: 50 N; 10,000 cycles per step; 20 Hz). Fatigue data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Weibull statistical analyses. Fractography and topography analyses were also conducted. The fatigue findings demonstrated that the performance among groups for both baseline and aging conditions maintained a tendency: the CA groups had the worst behavior (baseline: 893 N/143,667 cycles; aging: 639 N/84,179 cycles), while the surface etching with HF (baseline: 1247 N/214,333 cycles; aging: 816.67 N/128,333 cycles) and HF+CA groups (baseline: 1290 N/222,333 cycles; aging: 900 N/145,000 cycles) had no statistically significant difference between them. The aging protocol reduced the performance of all groups. The groups with better fatigue performance (HF and HF+CA) did not have statistical differences regarding structural reliability (Weibull modulus). Most failures were radial cracks from the cementation interface, except for CA aging specimens, with 27% failing from debonding. The HF etching led to noteworthy surface topographical alterations. Micromechanical interlocking resulting from HF acid etching remained prevalent in the fatigue behavior. Thus, the silane-based coupling agent (Monobond N) does not need to be applied after HF etching in terms of fatigue behavior outcomes.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".