Role of the interface in determining the dielectric properties of nanocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been demonstrated that the electrical breakdown properties of polymer composites can be substantially enhanced when the filler particles are of nanometric dimensions. These benefits are likely related to the mitigation and redistribution of internal charge. Using the example of an epoxy-TiO/sub 2/ nanodielectric (and a comparable conventional composite), this contribution seeks to examine this issue from the physical and chemical viewpoint. It is shown that a reduction in free volume cannot be used to explain the dielectric enhancements. The free volume of nanomaterials is actually higher than that of conventional samples. This conclusion is consistent with recent application of electron paramagnetic resonance spectra which have confirmed earlier speculation that the environment associated with the interface is radically changed when the in-filled particulates are reduced to nanometric dimensions and the associated interfacial area is greatly increased. Through examinations of infrared absorption and EPR measurements, the paper provides some speculation on the part played by an interaction zone surrounding the particulate inclusions. The presence of a highly mobile interlayer is thought to be the key to the electrical property changes seen.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".