Physiological Response of a Natural Central Incisor Tooth to Various Loading Conditions: A 3D Finite Element Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluates the influence of different loading angles and the area of loading on the ensuing stress distribution and the physical response of a natural central incisor tooth, using a 3D finite element analysis. The CAD model of the incisor tooth assembly (including enamel, dentin, periodontal ligament, pulp, gingiva and jaw bone) was subject to an external (chewing) load of 100 N, over four different areas and at four different angles along the vertical. It was observed that the tooth experiences high von-Mises equivalent stresses and high bending when the load applied is closer to the incisal edge of the crown. Also, the stresses on the dentin, in general, increased with the increase in the loading angle regardless of the area of loading; with the highest stress (~70 MPa) generated at 45° angle. The percentage change observed in dentin von-Mises stresses was higher than that of enamel when the loading angle was increased from 0° to 45°, because of the higher stiffness of enamel and structural differences in enamel and dentin. The numerical results indicated that applying loads on incisal edge would simulate a severe loading condition for the incisor tooth.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".