Integrability criteria for dierential equations on the projective plane.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When extended distally due to higher loading in the posterior region, implant-supported bar-retained overdentures with cantilever bar extension exhibit greater bending moments on the implants closest to the cantilever bar and increased stresses in the overdenture components. In this study, a new abutment-bar structure connection was introduced to minimize undesired bending moments and reduce the resulting stresses by increasing the rotational mobility of the bar structure on the abutments. Copings of the bar structure were modified to have 2 spherical surfaces, sharing the same center, located at the centroid of the top surface of the coping screw head. The new connection design was applied to a 4 implant-supported mandibular overdenture to create a modified overdenture. Both the classical and modified models had bar structures with cantilever extensions in the first and second molar areas and were analyzed for deformation and stress distribution using finite element analysis, which was also conducted for both the overdenture models without cantilever bar extensions. Real-scale prototypes of both models with cantilever extensions were manufactured, assembled on implants embedded in polyurethane blocks, and subjected to fatigue testing. Both models' implants were subjected to pullout testing. The new connection design increased the rotational mobility of the bar structure, minimized the bending moment effects, and reduced the stress levels in the peri-implant bone and overdenture components, whether cantilevered or not. Our results verify the effects of rotational mobility of the bar structure on the abutments and validate the importance of the abutment-bar connection geometry as a design parameter.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".