Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2024 |
Other Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | eng |
Source: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Download full: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2024.07.013 https://hdl.handle.net/11449/298280 |
Summary: | Objective: To assess the prediction accuracy of recent optical and numerical models for the spectral reflectance and color of monolithic samples of dental materials with different thicknesses. Methods: Samples of dental resin composites of Aura Easy Flow (Ae1, Ae3 and Ae4 shades) and Estelite Universal Flow Super Low (A1, A2, A3, A3.5, A4 and A5 shades) with thicknesses between 0.3 and 1.8 mm, as well as Estelite Universal Flow Medium (A2, A3, OA2 and OA3 shades) with thicknesses between 0.4 and 2.0 mm, were used. Spectral reflectance and transmittance factors of all samples were measured using a X-Rite Color i7 spectrophotometer. Four analytical optical models (2 two-flux models and 2 four-flux models) and two numerical models (PCA-based and L*a*b*-based) were implemented to predict spectral reflectance of all samples and then convert them into CIE-L*a*b* color coordinates (D65 illuminant, 2°Observer). The CIEDE2000 total color difference formula (ΔE00) between predicted and measured colors, and the corresponding 50:50% acceptability and perceptibility thresholds (AT00 and PT00) were used for performance assessment. Results: The best performing optical model was the four-flux model RTE-4F-RT, with an average ΔE00 = 0.72 over all samples, 94.87% of the differences below AT00 and 65.38% below PT00. The best performing numerical model was L*a*b*-PCHIP (interpolation mode), with an average ΔE00 = 0.48, and 100% and 79.69% of the differences below AT00 and PT00, respectively. Significance: Both optical and numerical models offer comparable color prediction accuracy, offering flexibility in model choice. These results help guide decision-making on prediction methods by clarifying their strengths and limitations. |
id |
UNSP_0279d91f81c630b23b21b6c97672415e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/298280 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknessesColor predictionFour-fluxKubelka–MunkNumerical modelsOptical modelsPrincipal component analysisReflectance predictionObjective: To assess the prediction accuracy of recent optical and numerical models for the spectral reflectance and color of monolithic samples of dental materials with different thicknesses. Methods: Samples of dental resin composites of Aura Easy Flow (Ae1, Ae3 and Ae4 shades) and Estelite Universal Flow Super Low (A1, A2, A3, A3.5, A4 and A5 shades) with thicknesses between 0.3 and 1.8 mm, as well as Estelite Universal Flow Medium (A2, A3, OA2 and OA3 shades) with thicknesses between 0.4 and 2.0 mm, were used. Spectral reflectance and transmittance factors of all samples were measured using a X-Rite Color i7 spectrophotometer. Four analytical optical models (2 two-flux models and 2 four-flux models) and two numerical models (PCA-based and L*a*b*-based) were implemented to predict spectral reflectance of all samples and then convert them into CIE-L*a*b* color coordinates (D65 illuminant, 2°Observer). The CIEDE2000 total color difference formula (ΔE00) between predicted and measured colors, and the corresponding 50:50% acceptability and perceptibility thresholds (AT00 and PT00) were used for performance assessment. Results: The best performing optical model was the four-flux model RTE-4F-RT, with an average ΔE00 = 0.72 over all samples, 94.87% of the differences below AT00 and 65.38% below PT00. The best performing numerical model was L*a*b*-PCHIP (interpolation mode), with an average ΔE00 = 0.48, and 100% and 79.69% of the differences below AT00 and PT00, respectively. Significance: Both optical and numerical models offer comparable color prediction accuracy, offering flexibility in model choice. These results help guide decision-making on prediction methods by clarifying their strengths and limitations.Agence Nationale de la RechercheUniversité de LyonDepartment of Optics Faculty of Science University of Granada, Campus de Fuentenueva, s/n 18071Université Jean Monnet Saint-Etienne CNRS Institut d Optique Graduate School Laboratoire Hubert Curien UMR 5516Department of Physics Faculty of Sciences University of Craiova, 13 AI Cuza StreetUniv Lyon INSA-Lyon Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 UJM-Saint Etienne CNRS Inserm CREATIS UMR 5220 U1294Faculté d'Odontologie de Nancy (CHRU)Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Department Araraquara's Dental School (UNESP Brazil)OHSU Dental Biomaterials DepartmentDepartment of Computer Architecture and Computer Technology E.T.S.I.I.T. University of Granada, s/n 18071Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Department Araraquara's Dental School (UNESP Brazil)Agence Nationale de la Recherche: ANR-11-IDEX-0007Université de Lyon: ANR-11-LABX-0063University of GranadaLaboratoire Hubert Curien UMR 5516University of CraiovaU1294Faculté d'Odontologie de Nancy (CHRU)Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Dental Biomaterials DepartmentE.T.S.I.I.T. University of GranadaTejada-Casado, MariaDuveiller, VincentGhinea, RazvanGautheron, ArthurClerc, RaphaëlSalomon, Jean-Pierre [UNESP]Pérez, María del MarHébert, MathieuHerrera, Luis Javier2025-04-29T18:36:42Z2024-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article1677-1684http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2024.07.013Dental Materials, v. 40, n. 10, p. 1677-1684, 2024.0109-5641https://hdl.handle.net/11449/29828010.1016/j.dental.2024.07.0132-s2.0-85200269583Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengDental Materialsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2025-05-01T05:42:33Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/298280Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestrepositoriounesp@unesp.bropendoar:29462025-05-01T05:42:33Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses |
title |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses |
spellingShingle |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses Tejada-Casado, Maria Color prediction Four-flux Kubelka–Munk Numerical models Optical models Principal component analysis Reflectance prediction |
title_short |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses |
title_full |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses |
title_fullStr |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses |
title_sort |
Comparative analysis of optical and numerical models for reflectance and color prediction of monolithic dental resin composites with varying thicknesses |
author |
Tejada-Casado, Maria |
author_facet |
Tejada-Casado, Maria Duveiller, Vincent Ghinea, Razvan Gautheron, Arthur Clerc, Raphaël Salomon, Jean-Pierre [UNESP] Pérez, María del Mar Hébert, Mathieu Herrera, Luis Javier |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Duveiller, Vincent Ghinea, Razvan Gautheron, Arthur Clerc, Raphaël Salomon, Jean-Pierre [UNESP] Pérez, María del Mar Hébert, Mathieu Herrera, Luis Javier |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
University of Granada Laboratoire Hubert Curien UMR 5516 University of Craiova U1294 Faculté d'Odontologie de Nancy (CHRU) Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) Dental Biomaterials Department E.T.S.I.I.T. University of Granada |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Tejada-Casado, Maria Duveiller, Vincent Ghinea, Razvan Gautheron, Arthur Clerc, Raphaël Salomon, Jean-Pierre [UNESP] Pérez, María del Mar Hébert, Mathieu Herrera, Luis Javier |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Color prediction Four-flux Kubelka–Munk Numerical models Optical models Principal component analysis Reflectance prediction |
topic |
Color prediction Four-flux Kubelka–Munk Numerical models Optical models Principal component analysis Reflectance prediction |
description |
Objective: To assess the prediction accuracy of recent optical and numerical models for the spectral reflectance and color of monolithic samples of dental materials with different thicknesses. Methods: Samples of dental resin composites of Aura Easy Flow (Ae1, Ae3 and Ae4 shades) and Estelite Universal Flow Super Low (A1, A2, A3, A3.5, A4 and A5 shades) with thicknesses between 0.3 and 1.8 mm, as well as Estelite Universal Flow Medium (A2, A3, OA2 and OA3 shades) with thicknesses between 0.4 and 2.0 mm, were used. Spectral reflectance and transmittance factors of all samples were measured using a X-Rite Color i7 spectrophotometer. Four analytical optical models (2 two-flux models and 2 four-flux models) and two numerical models (PCA-based and L*a*b*-based) were implemented to predict spectral reflectance of all samples and then convert them into CIE-L*a*b* color coordinates (D65 illuminant, 2°Observer). The CIEDE2000 total color difference formula (ΔE00) between predicted and measured colors, and the corresponding 50:50% acceptability and perceptibility thresholds (AT00 and PT00) were used for performance assessment. Results: The best performing optical model was the four-flux model RTE-4F-RT, with an average ΔE00 = 0.72 over all samples, 94.87% of the differences below AT00 and 65.38% below PT00. The best performing numerical model was L*a*b*-PCHIP (interpolation mode), with an average ΔE00 = 0.48, and 100% and 79.69% of the differences below AT00 and PT00, respectively. Significance: Both optical and numerical models offer comparable color prediction accuracy, offering flexibility in model choice. These results help guide decision-making on prediction methods by clarifying their strengths and limitations. |
publishDate |
2024 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2024-10-01 2025-04-29T18:36:42Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2024.07.013 Dental Materials, v. 40, n. 10, p. 1677-1684, 2024. 0109-5641 https://hdl.handle.net/11449/298280 10.1016/j.dental.2024.07.013 2-s2.0-85200269583 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2024.07.013 https://hdl.handle.net/11449/298280 |
identifier_str_mv |
Dental Materials, v. 40, n. 10, p. 1677-1684, 2024. 0109-5641 10.1016/j.dental.2024.07.013 2-s2.0-85200269583 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Materials |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
1677-1684 |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositoriounesp@unesp.br |
_version_ |
1834482753171619840 |