Adhesion of Poly(vinylamine) Microgels to Wet Cellulose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poly( N -vinylformamide) microgel, crosslinked by 1,3-divinylimidazolid-2-one (BVU), was synthesized via precipitation polymerization in methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), giving aggregated particles with a broad size distribution. Alkaline hydrolysis yielded a series of poly(vinylamine) (PVAm) microgels. The wet adhesion properties of the microgels on a regenerated cellulose membrane were studied by delamination experiments, and the results were compared with that of a linear PVAm. Above the polymer coverage (i.e., the amount of polymer in the adhesive joint) of 15 mg/m 2, the linear polymer and the microgel give similar adhesion, and higher polymer coverage does not increase the wet strength any further. However, when the polymers are applied on the wet cellulose membranes by adsorption from solution, the delamination force of the membranes with the microgel was much stronger than those with the linear polymer, because the microgel formed a much thicker polymer layer on membranes. Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) images of laminates prepared with fluorescently labeled polymers and microgels revealed that the linear polymer gives cohesive failure during peeling test, while adhesive failure is dominant for the microgel.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".