Atomic force microscopic and encrustation studies of novel prospective polyisobutylene‐based thermoplastic elastomeric biomaterials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper investigates the surface morphology of polyisobutylene–polystyrene (PIB–PS) block‐type thermoplastic elastomers, emerging new biomaterials, by atomic force microscopy (AFM). A novel aborescent PIB–PS block polymer (AR15) was synthesized through inimer‐type living carbocationic polymerization and characterized in comparison with a semi‐commercial PIB–PS thermoplastic elastomer (TPE) (TS30). Tapping‐mode AFM revealed that PS spheres with a domain size of 45–60 nm were very irregularly distributed in the continuous PIB phase of the aborescent AR15 polymer, whereas ordered and mixed cylindrical/lamellar morphology with 25–31 nm hard phase appeared in a linear TS30 triblock polymer. Moreover, AFM revealed rough surface features of a 1 mm thick compression molded TS30 polymer disk coated with a probiotic protein. AR15 disks were used for in vivo urinary tract encrustation study. Encrustation of the PIB–PS disks was comparable or better than that of medical‐grade silicone rubber. The preliminary results imply the prospect of PIB–PS thermoplastic elastomers as emerging soft biomaterials. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".