Characterization, degradation, and mechanical strength of poly(<scp>D,L</scp>‐lactide‐<i>co</i>‐ϵ‐caprolactone)‐poly(ethylene glycol)‐poly(<scp>D,L</scp>‐lactide‐<i>co</i>‐ϵ‐caprolactone)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of three biocompatible P(CL-co-LA)-PEG-P(CL-co-LA) copolymers were synthesized using ring-opening polymerization and characterized by 1H-NMR, gel permeation chromatography, DSC, dynamic-mechanical analysis, and X-ray diffraction. The number of monomer units was kept constant, while the D,L-LA fraction was varied so as to constitute 0, 30, or 70% of the end segments. The molecular weights were sufficiently high to eventually permit 3D scaffold preparation. A degradation study was carried out over 26 weeks, and the effect of monomer composition on the rate of degradation as well as on changes in mechanical strength was investigated. Pure polycaprolactone (PCL)-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG)-PCL copolymer, P(100/0), was a crystalline material displaying no measurable mass loss, a 30% reduction in mean molecular weight (Mn), and only very slight changes in tensile strength. The random incorporation of 30 and 70% D,L-LA into the end sections of the polymer chain, produced more and more amorphous materials, exhibiting increasingly high rates of degradation, mass loss, and loss of tensile strength. Compared with random P(CL-co-LA), the presence of the PEG block was found both to improve hydrophilicity and thus the rate of degradation and to infer a stabilizing quality, thereby pacing the decrease in tensile strength during degradation. The tested copolymers range from materials exhibiting low mechanical strength and high rate of degradation to slow-degrading materials with high mechanical strength suitable, e.g., for three-dimensional scaffolding.
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 | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".