MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401369586 · doi:10.6026/973206300200547

Application of CAD-CAM in Dentistry

2024· article· en· W4401369586 on OpenAlexaff
Niladri Maiti, Niva Mahapatra, Dhruvi Patel, Jeel Chanchad, A Shah, S. K. Mahboob Rahaman, Pratik Surana

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsGeorge Brown College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCADInlayDentistryComputer-aided manufacturingMedicineComputer Aided DesignComputer scienceOrthodonticsEngineering drawingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of CAD-CAM (Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing) technology has become increasingly prevalent in dentistry in recent years. Dental restorations are designed and created using CAD-CAM by enhancing the precision and efficiency. Customization of dental prostheses such as crowns, veneers, inlays, onlays and bridges is possible with CAD-CAM.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformationSame topicDental materials and restorationsFrench-language works237,207