Thermography and conversion of fast-cure composite photocured with quad-wave and laser curing lights compared to a conventional curing light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated effects of the different emittance-mode protocols from three light curing units (LCUs): (i) a Laser (Monet); (ii) a quad-wave (PinkWave); (iii) a conventional LED (Elipar S10) on the temperature rise (ΔT) and degree of conversion (DC) when photo-curing fast or conventional bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBC). The aim was to correlate ΔT and DC, and the radiant exposure delivered to RBC specimens. A 3D-printed resin mold of 4 mm depth was filled with two bulk-fill RBCs: Tetric PowerFill® (fast photo-polymerised composite) (TPF) or Tetric EvoCeram® Bulk-Fill (EVO). Three LCUs were used: (i) Monet laser for 1 s and 3 s (MONET-1 s, MONET-3 s); (ii) PinkWave quad-wave used for 3 s in Boost mode (PW-3 s) and for 20 s in standard mode (PW-20 s); (iii) Elipar S10 for 5 s (S10–5 s) and for 20 s in standard mode (S10–20 s). 2-dimensional temperature maps were obtained before, during and for 60 s after the LCU had turned off using a thermal imaging camera. Thermal changes were analysed at five depths: (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 mm from the top surface of the RBC). The maximum temperature rise (Tmax) and the mean temperature rise (ΔT) were determined. Cylindrical-shaped specimens were prepared from each material using a stainless-steel split mold (4 × 4 mm) and light-cured with the same protocols. The DC was measured for 120 s and at 1 h after LCU had turned off using Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). Data were analysed using Three-way ANOVA, One-way ANOVA, independent t-tests, and Tukey post-hoc tests (p < 0.05). Radiant exposures delivered by the various irradiation protocols were between 4.5–30.3 J/cm2. Short exposure times from MONET-1 s and PW-3 s delivered the lowest radiant exposures (4.5 and 5.2 J/cm2, respectively) and produced the lowest ΔT and DC. The longer exposure times in the standard modes of PW-20 s, S10–20 s, and MONET-3 s produced the highest Tmax, ΔT, and DC for both composites. The ΔT range among composites at different depths varied significantly (31.7–49.9 °C). DC of TPF ranged between 30–65% and in EVO between 15.3–56%. TPF had higher Tmax, ΔT for all depths and DC compared to EVO, across the LCU protocols (p < 0.05), except for PW-20 s and MONET-3 s. The coronal part of the restorations (1–2 mm) had the highest ΔT. There was a positive correlation between ΔT and DC at 4-mm depth after 120 s Longer, or standard, exposure times of the LCUs delivered greater radiant exposures and had higher DC and ΔT compared to shorter or high-irradiance protocols. The fast photo-polymerised RBC had comparatively superior thermal and conversion outcomes when it received a high irradiance for a short time (1–5 s) compared to the conventional Bulk-Fill RBC.
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".