Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness of a dual cure conventional resin cement light-cured either through or without the indirect restoration and tested immediate or 24 h after polymerization. The light transmission was evaluated through three types (Lava Ultimate, 3M ESPE; Vita Enamic, Vita Zahnfabrik; Emax CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent e Brava Block, FGM) and four thickness (1,0/1,5/2,0 e 3,0 mm) of CAD-CAM materials with a spectrometer (MARC PS system, Bluelight Analytics, Halifax, NS, Canada). The specimens (n=5) of the luting resin cement RelyX ARC (3M ESPE/ Cor A1) were made in the cylindrical ring stainless steel mold with dimensions 8.0 mm in diameter and 0.5 mm thickness. Samples were polymerized through a mylar strip, with or without (positive control) interposition of CAD-CAM discs for 40 seconds using a LED Emitter C (Schuster), with 1200 mW/cm2. The negative control was not photoactivated. The resin cement specimens were submitted to microhardness tests (HMV-2; Shimadzu, Tokyo, Japan), with a load of 50g applied for 10 seconds, immediate after polymerization and after storage at 37ºC for 24 hours. Three indentations were made on the top surface of each specimen. The microhardness of each specimen was recorded as the average of the three readings. Data were submitted to ANOVA followed by Bonferroni and Dunnet post hoc test (α = 0.05). Statistically significant differences were found in irradiance values measured through the materials, in relation to that measured directly at the tip of the light source, and between the different thicknesses. In general, microhardness values were not affected by the material type or thickness. The hardness was negatively influenced by the interposition of an indirect restorative material. There was a significant increase in Knoop hardness after 24 hours.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.824 | 0.661 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".