Phase Behavior of Ternary Homopolymer/Gradient Copolymer Blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phase behavior of ternary homopolymer/gradient copolymer blends is studied theoretically using a multiblock model of gradient copolymers. Critical lines and Lifshitz points of the blends are determined by a random phase approximation analysis. Phase diagrams and microphase structures of the blends are studied using self-consistent mean-field theory. It is discovered that the chain gradient distribution has a significant effect on the phase behavior of the blends. When the chain gradient distribution is gradual, a larger amount of copolymers and a higher incompatibility are needed for the formation of a microphase. In addition, the ability of copolymer domains to absorb homopolymers decreases, whereas the solubility of copolymers in homopolymer matrix increases, as the gradient distribution becomes gradual. Another important effect is that gradient copolymers lead to a broad interface between two incompatible polymers. These results indicate that interfacial structure and morphology of these blends can be fine-tuned by specifically designed gradient distributions.
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) | 0.002 | 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".