MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1962392882 · doi:10.15376/biores.7.1.902-912

Release paper: Can phosphate esters be an alternative to silicone?

2012· article· en· W1962392882 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioResources · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterial Properties and Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAdhesiveSiliconePhosphateMaterials scienceSubstrate (aquarium)PolymerComposite materialChemical engineeringPolymer scienceOrganic chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Release paper is a special paper grade with one or both sides coated with non-sticking materials. Silicone is currently the only material used to produce release paper at the industrial level. Its remarkable properties and availability ensure product quality and sustainability of the industrial production. Meanwhile, the stability of silicone polymers raises serious environmental problems in terms of paper substrate recyclability. Studies are currently under way to evaluate the ability of phosphate esters as a new class of compounds capable of developing non-adhesive surface properties. This paper presents initial attempts to coat the paper with phosphate esters and to assess phosphate ester / fibrous substrate and phosphate ester / adhesive interactions. The results show that this class of compounds exhibits non-adhesive properties and, when coated on paper under certain conditions, can lead to a non-sticking surface. Despite the fact that there is a long way to achieve ester anchoring to surface fibers and to control the peeling force from an adhesive tape, preliminary results are encouraging.

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 score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.201 · 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