MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399922703 · doi:10.18280/rcma.340313

Enhancing Mechanical Performance of PMMA Resin Through Cinnamon Particle Reinforcement

2024· article· fr· W4399922703 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah Khaled Awad, Waleed Bdaiwi

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des composites et des matériaux avancés · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcementComposite materialMaterials scienceParticle (ecology)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article discusses an experimental procedure which involves impregnating cinnamon extracts into Poly Methyl Methacrylate (PMMA) resin with further purpose of utilizing it for dental prosthesis purposes.At normalized sampling rates and through manual molding using 53μm particle size, samples comprising of 8%, 6%, 4%, 2% and 0% volume fractions were evaluated.Mechanical properties such as hardness, impact strength, and tensile strength were also investigated empirically.The findings demonstrated an increase in hardness, reaching a maximum level of 8% with a value of 86 N/m² .Also, impact strength coefficient marked rather a positive effect, with 0.93 KJ/m² being the highest peak noticed at the 6% volume fraction level.The peak value of tensile strength was successfully measured at 4% by volume fraction that gave 52 MPa, while additional ratios of reinforcement had a continuous trend of a decrease.This thorough study uncovers the future promising potential of cinnamon extracts as to the reinforcement of technical properties (mechanical properties), and this contributes to the improvement of modern biomaterials used in Dentistry.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des composites et des matériaux avancésSame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207