MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Action of water in the degradation of low-density polyethylene studied by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

2007· article· en· W1972490737 on OpenAlexafffund
Sylvain Massey, A. Adnot, Abdelilah Rjeb, Denis Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueeXPRESS Polymer Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer crystallization and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyDegradation (telecommunications)Materials sciencePolyethyleneHigh-density polyethyleneSpectroscopyX-rayChemical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Composite materialEnvironmental chemistryOpticsChemistryPhysicsComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial low-density polyethylene (LDPE) was aged in stagnant distilled water during one year.Two types of this material were studied.The first one was without additives and the second type was doped with 4% of hindered-amine light stabilizers (HALS).Using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), the evidence that an oxidation occurs was demonstrated for the two types of LDPE (with and without HALS).One objective was to observe the chemical groups resulting of the ageing and to propose a mechanism of hydrolytic degradation for LDPE.The analysis of C1s spectra shows that the main oxidation products are C-O and C=O groups.Unlike the hydrolytic degradation of polypropylene, there is no presence of O=C-O groups, which suggests that there is no oxidative chain scission during hydrolytic ageing of the LDPE.The other objective of the study was to observe if the HALS can have an influence in the hydrolytic ageing of the LDPE.The values of the atomic concentration of the oxygen for the two types of samples show that the HALS could slightly slow down the oxidation of the LDPE.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeXPRESS Polymer LettersSame topicPolymer crystallization and propertiesFrench-language works237,207