MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408043606 · doi:10.1016/j.dental.2025.02.005

Evaluation of a quadwave curing light compared to a dual-peak LED curing light

2025· article· en· W4408043606 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDental Materials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPhotopolymerization techniques and applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersRural Business-Cooperative ServiceMitacsCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMaterials scienceCuring (chemistry)Light guideComposite materialOpticsLight source

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the PinkWave (PW) light-curing unit (LCU) that emits red and infrared (IR) light as well as violet and blue light improves the depth of cure and degree of conversion (DC) of resin-based composites (RBCs). METHODS: The DC of RBCs at various distances was calculated from data collected at a rate of 13 Hz using attenuated total reflectance Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy. To assess the contributions of the different wavelengths of light, optical filters were used to block the red and IR light from the PW. The depth of cure was also evaluated by photocuring RBC samples in both metal and plastic molds for 20 s at a 0 mm distance. The length of resin remaining was then measured and divided by 2. Starting from a baseline of 32 °C, the temperature rise during photocuring was measured in the plastic and metal rings reproducing the conditions used to measure the depth of cure and the DC respectively. RESULTS: In general, the PW produced greater depth of cure, however the use of metal molds greatly reduced this effect because the temperature increase was reduced. Increasing the distance by up to 4 mm from the light tip produced a significant increase in the DC for the RBCs photocured with the PW, but not for the G4. The wavelength of the blue peak (peaking at 473 nm) from the PW was longer compared to the control LCU (peaking at 448 nm). This 25 nm difference negatively affected the photocuring efficiency of some resins. SIGNIFICANCE: The internal optics and the additional red and IR wavelengths from the PW significantly increased the temperature in the RBCs and increased both depth of cure and the DC.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.298 · 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