Artificial intelligence and mixed reality for dental implant planning: A technical note
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this work is to present a new protocol for implant surgical planning which involves the combined use of artificial intelligence (AI) and mixed reality (MR). METHODS: This protocol involves the acquisition of three-dimensional (3D) patient data through intraoral scanning (IOS) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). These data are loaded into AI software which automatically segments and aligns the patient's 3D models. These 3D models are loaded into MR software and used for planning implant surgery through holography. The files are then exported and used to design surgical guides via open-source software, which are 3D printed and used to prepare the implant sites through static computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS). The case is finalized prosthetically through a fully digital protocol. The accuracy of implant positioning is verified by comparing the planned position with the actual position of the implants after surgery. RESULTS: As a proof of principle, the present protocol seems to be to be reliable and efficient when used for planning simple cases of s-CAIS in partially edentulous patients. The clinician can plan the implants in an authentic 3D environment without using any radiology-guided surgery software. The precision of implant placement seems clinically acceptable, with minor deviations. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that AI and MR technologies can be successfully used in s-CAIS for an authentic 3D planning. Further clinical studies are needed to validate this protocol.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".