Synthesis and properties of arborescent polyisobutylene‐poly(ethylene oxide) graft copolymers: a comparison of linear and arborescent graft copolymer architectures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Polymer architecture can have a significant effect on the properties and potential applications of materials. In this study, arborescent polyisobutylene ( PIB )‐poly(ethylene oxide) ( PEO ) graft copolymers with varying PEO content were synthesized from arborescent PIB ‐ co ‐polyisoprene and compared with linear PIB‐PEO graft copolymers. By AFM imaging, phase separation was detected in a 48 wt% PEO arborescent copolymer. Tensile testing revealed that, in general, increasing PEO content led to increased tensile strength and Young's modulus but decreased elongation at break. Arborescent analogues exhibited lower elongation at break and lower strength compared with linear analogues but also less plastic deformation and yielding behaviour. Like linear analogues of comparable PEO content, films of the arborescent graft copolymers resisted the adsorption of rhodamine‐labelled fibrinogen, suggesting that they may also exhibit non‐fouling properties. Finally, the assembly of these amphiphilic copolymers in aqueous solution was investigated. Unlike the linear analogues, the sizes of the assemblies were not greatly affected by their method of preparation. This work demonstrates that it is possible to prepare PIB ‐based materials with a wide range of interesting properties by tuning not only the content of PEO but also the architectures of the macromolecules. © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".