This paper confines itself to the description of the profile of a general dentist while outlining where the boundary between specialist and generalist may lie. The profile must reflect the need to recognize that oral health is part of general health. The epidemiological trends and disease variation of a country should inform the profile of the dentist. A particular tension between the provision of oral healthcare in publicly funded and private services may result in dentists practicing dentistry in different ways. However, the curriculum should equip the practitioner for either scenario. A dentist should work to standards appropriate to the needs of the individual and the population within the country's legal and ethical framework. He/she should have communication skills appropriate to ascertain the patient's beliefs and values. A dentist should work within the principles of equity and diversity and have the knowledge and clinical competence for independent general practice, including knowledge of health promotion and prevention. He/she should participate in life-long learning, which should result in a reflective practitioner whose clinical skills reflect the current evidence base, scientific breakthroughs and needs of their patients. Within the 4-5 years of a dental degree it is not possible for a student to achieve proficiency in all areas of dentistry. He/she needs to have the ability to know their own limitations and to access appropriate specialist advice for their patients while taking responsibility for the oral healthcare they provide. The dentist has the role of leader of the oral health team and, in this capacity; he/she is responsible for diagnosis, treatment planning and the quality control of the oral treatment. The dental student on graduation must therefore understand the principles and techniques which enable the dentist to act in this role. He/she should have the abilities to communicate, delegate and collaborate both within the dental team and with other health professionals, to the benefit of the patient. The profile of a dentist should encompass the points raised but will also be based upon competency lists which are published by a variety of countries and organizations. It is important that these lists are dynamic so that they are able to change in light of new evidence and technologies.

University Complutense of Madrid, Spain; Cardiff University, UK; Dutch Dental Association, Nieuwegein, Netherlands; University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, USA; University of Leeds, UK; Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic; Howard University, Washington DC, USA; National University of Singapore; Dental Education Consultant, London UK; University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; University of Detroit Mercy, Michigan USA.

A concept of partition temperature is introduced in high-energy collisions. It is a natural mathematical consequence of the Darwin-Fowler method, and neither requires nor implies thermal equilibrium. A collision at a given incoming energy is described as an incoherent superposition of collisions with different partition temperatures. Angular distributions are then presented for $\sqrt{s}=540$ GeV collisions.

We study all available half-favored inclusive single-particle distributions in terms of a quark recombination model. We found that (i) after subtracting out the contributions from resonance decays and diffractive productions, meson-initiated and proton-initiated processes can be described by the same model, and (ii) the shapes of all inclusive distributions, which are produced via VS or VSS recombinations, in the fragmentation region can be described by a generalized Van Hove-Pokorski model with no free parameter.

We propose to explain the recently observed enhancement of baryon production in ϒ decay by assuming ( i ) g → q q , ( ii ) q− q , q−q , q − q systems will occasionally act as a single entity. The ratio between number of “fast” baryons plus anti-baryons and “fast” hadrons is predicted in our model to be 0.52–0.54 in excellent agreement with the experimental value 0.56 ± 0.25. e + e − → gq q is also discussed.

We propose to explain the recently observed enhancement of baryon production in ϒ decay by assuming (i) g → qq, (ii) q−q, q−q, q−q systems will occasionally act as a single entity. The ratio between number of “fast” baryons plus anti-baryons and “fast” hadrons is predicted in our model to be 0.52–0.54 in excellent agreement with the experimental value 0.56 ± 0.25. e+e− → gqq is also discussed.

We show that inclusive production data on nuclear targets at large transverse momentum can be interpreted according to the general features of the parton model. The data are inconsistent with "cascade" models, in which produced particles are assumed to interact independently with the nucleons in the nucleus. We propose an interpretation of the ${A}^{1.1}\ensuremath{-}{A}^{1.3}$ behavior which has been observed at $s=560$ ${\mathrm{GeV}}^{2}$.

We suggest that the invariant cross section for $a+b\ensuremath{\rightarrow}c+X$ should be plotted in terms of ($\stackrel{\ifmmode \tilde{}\else \~{}\fi{}}{x},{P}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}$), where $\stackrel{\ifmmode \tilde{}\else \~{}\fi{}}{x}=\frac{2{E}^{*}}{\sqrt{s}}$ and ${E}^{*}$ is the energy of particle $c$ in the center-of-mass system. We have shown for processes with exotic $\mathrm{ab}\overline{c}$ [such as $p+p\ensuremath{\rightarrow}({\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}},{K}^{\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}},\overline{p})+X$] that the invariant cross sections $\frac{E{d}^{3}\ensuremath{\sigma}}{{d}^{3}p}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}f(\stackrel{\ifmmode \tilde{}\else \~{}\fi{}}{x},{P}_{\ensuremath{\perp}})$ at ${P}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}=0.2, 0.4, \mathrm{and} 0.8$ GeV/c over an energy range of ${P}_{\mathrm{inc}}=12\ensuremath{-}1500$ GeV/c. Furthermore, scaling in terms of ($\stackrel{\ifmmode \tilde{}\else \~{}\fi{}}{x},{P}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}$) provides a natural connection between the small-${P}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}$ and large-${P}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}$ regions. Predictions on the single-particle distribution when both ${P}_{\ensuremath{\parallel}}^{*}$ and ${P}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{*}$ are large are also presented.

The ($\frac{{\ensuremath{\mu}}^{+}}{{\ensuremath{\mu}}^{\ensuremath{-}}}$) ratio at sea level has been calculated by Frazer et al., using the hypothesis of limiting fragmentation together with the inclusive data below 30 GeV/c. They obtained a value of $\frac{{\ensuremath{\mu}}^{+}}{{\ensuremath{\mu}}^{\ensuremath{-}}}\ensuremath{\simeq}1.56$, to be compared with experimental value of 1.2 to 1.4. We have calculated the ratio using the recent ISR (CERN Intersecting Storage Rings) data, and obtained a value of $\frac{{\ensuremath{\mu}}^{+}}{{\ensuremath{\mu}}^{\ensuremath{-}}}\ensuremath{\sim}1.40$ in good agreement with the experimental result.

An analysis of single particle distributions of π mesons from a high statistics pp anihilation at 2.32 GeV/c is presented. It has been found that in the reactions pp → n π with n = 4, 5, 6 and 7, the gross features of the c.m. longitudinal and the transverse momentum distributions follow close to the phase space.

Explanation is given for observed sharp forward peaks in distributions of transverse momentum for hadrons produced in deeply inelastic hadron collisions. Small $Q$-value decay of peripherally produced nucleon resonances is the basic mechanism responsible for peaks in both $\ensuremath{\pi}$ and proton spectra. Implications of this result are discussed.

A hypothesis of limiting fragmentation of the target and of the projectile in a high-energy lepton-hadron or hadron-hadron collision is defined. Arguments are given for the hypothesis. Comparisons with various models and concepts are made. Further speculations are made, including the absence of pionization processes in high-energy collisions and the dependence of multiplicity on the momentum transfer. Experiments are suggested.

Recent experiments on proton-proton scattering at high energies reveal the following features: (i) at 12.5 $\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c}$, $\frac{{d}^{2}\ensuremath{\sigma}}{d{P}^{*}d{\ensuremath{\Omega}}^{*}}$ for outgoing pions and ${K}^{+}$ in the center-of-mass system do not have a maximum at zero longitudinal momentum, but peak at about $P_{\mathrm{II}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*}\ensuremath{\approx}0.4\ensuremath{-}0.5$ $\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c}$ and drop rapidly as $P_{\mathrm{II}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}0$ for $P_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*2}=0.4$ ${(\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c})}^{2}$; (ii) at 30 $\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c}$, the fraction of outgoing protons having "large" momentum (\ensuremath{\ge}\textonehalf{} of the c.m. momentum for elastic scattering) in the c.m. system is greater than that of outgoing pions; (iii) at 12.5 $\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c}$, there are striking differences between the $\frac{{d}^{2}\ensuremath{\sigma}}{d{P}^{*}d{\ensuremath{\Omega}}^{*}}$ for outgoing ${K}^{+}$ and ${K}^{\ensuremath{-}}$ with $P_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*2}=0.4$ ${(\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c})}^{2}$ in the c.m. system. It is shown in this paper that these features can be understood if we assume that resonance production is important. Some other consequences of this assumption are also discussed. With some reasonable assumptions, estimates of the contributions to $(\frac{{d}^{2}\ensuremath{\sigma}}{d{P}^{*}d{\ensuremath{\Omega}}^{*}})(\frac{{d}^{2}\ensuremath{\sigma}}{dP_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*}dP_{\mathrm{II}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*}})$ for outgoing particles from various resonance production processes are made. Using a simple model for resonance production in proton-proton scattering at 30 $\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c}$, we obtain good fits with $\frac{{d}^{2}\ensuremath{\sigma}}{dP_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*}dP_{\mathrm{II}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*}}$ for outgoing ${\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}$ and $p$ in the "large" momentum region in the c.m. system. Using a similar model for resonance production in proton-proton scattering at 12.5 $\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c}$, we again obtain good fits with $\frac{{d}^{2}\ensuremath{\sigma}}{d{P}^{*}d{\ensuremath{\Omega}}^{*}}$ for outgoing pions and ${K}^{+}$ with $P_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{}{}_{}{}^{*2}=0.4$ ${(\frac{\mathrm{BeV}}{c})}^{2}$.

Received 10 January 1967DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.18.513©1967 American Physical Society