MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387820364 · doi:10.3390/polym15204161

Study of Water Sorption in Methacryl-Based Polyhedral Oligomeric Silsesquioxane (POSS) Dental Composites Using Molecular Dynamics Simulations

2023· article· en· W4387820364 on OpenAlexaff
Chandra Mouli R. Madhuranthakam, Sudharsan Pandiyan, Omar Chaalal, Ali Elkamel

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymers · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAbu Dhabi University
KeywordsSilsesquioxaneSorptionMaterials scienceComposite materialDental compositeComposite numberMethacrylatePolymerChemistryOrganic chemistryAdsorptionMonomer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methacrylate-based polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane (POSS) is one of the new composites used as a dental resin. Both monofunctional methacryl isobutyl POSS (MIPOSS) and multifunctional methacryl POSS (MAPOSS) are reported to be possible resins that possess the desired properties for using them as dental resins. Our group's previous comparative study on these two resins showed that the MAPOSS composite has superior mechanical properties compared with the MIPOSS composite. In this article, molecular dynamic simulations (MD simulations) are performed to study the water sorption in these two composites. Water sorption in dental composites can have several effects on the material properties, performance, and longevity of dental restorations. Water sorption in MAPOSS and MIPOSS composites is analyzed by studying the hydrogen bonding, cluster analysis, density projection calculations, and diffusion coefficient calculation of water molecules within the resin matrix. MD simulations results are further used to understand the interaction of water molecules with the resin matrix comprehensively, which governs the composite's mechanical properties. The water sorption study showed that the MAPOSS composite has less water sorption capacity than the MIPOSS composite. The practical significance of this study is to find properties that affect dental restoration and longevity, which can help in the design of better materials for dental applications.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymersSame topicDental materials and restorationsFrench-language works237,207