Effect of Inorganic Pigments on Polymer Interdiffusion in a Low-<i>T</i><sub>g</sub> Latex Film
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a continuing need to lower costs of coated paper production while at the same time maintaining or improving paper quality. To reach this goal, one would like to have the knowledge necessary to design the structure of the coating in a way that optimizes the use of latex as a pigment binder. For this purpose, one needs a deeper understanding of the role of the latex binder in the coating. We approach this problem by trying to understand how a large amount of pigment in the coating formulation affects the coalescence of latex particles and the subsequent polymer diffusion that enhances the mechanical properties. We carried out fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) measurements on latex films that allowed us to follow the extent of interparticle polymer diffusion as a function of time after the latex/pigment dispersion dried. The initial energy-transfer quantum efficiency data indicate that neither precipitated calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ) nor silica (SiO 2 ) promotes coalescence of the latex particles. CaCO 3 has little effect on the rate of polymer interdiffusion up to 80 wt %, whereas even a small amount of 25-nm silica particles has a significant influence.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".