MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941657305 · doi:10.1002/mren.201500017

Modeling Acrylic Acid Radical Polymerization in Aqueous Solution

2015· article· en· W1941657305 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Reaction Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadical polymerizationPolymerizationPolymer chemistryChain transferChemistryMolar massAcrylic acidAqueous solutionMonomerMolar mass distributionSolution polymerizationReversible addition−fragmentation chain-transfer polymerizationPolymerOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Batch radical polymerization of 5–40 wt% non‐ionized acrylic acid (AA) in aqueous solution has been studied between 35 and 90 °C under variation of initiator concentration and type as well as upon addition of different levels of 2‐mercaptoethanol as chain‐transfer agent (CTA). Chain‐length‐dependent termination was taken into account in a model developed to describe the system, as high amounts of CTA have an impact on polymerization kinetics due to reduced chain length. The model also considers the 1,5‐hydrogen shift (backbiting) reaction that transforms the secondary propagating radical into a tertiary midchain radical, with the backbiting reaction quantified via 13 C NMR. The model developed is the most comprehensive treatment to date of this complex polymerization system and is able to represent monomer conversion profiles and polymer molar mass distributions over a wide range of conditions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it