Comparative analysis of delayed‐onset peroxide crosslinking formulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strategies for affecting the onset and yield of peroxide‐initiated polymer crosslinking formulations are demonstrated and discussed in terms of underlying reaction mechanisms. Rheological studies of linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) crosslinking by dicumyl peroxide show that conventional antioxidants such as 3,5‐di‐ tert ‐4‐butylhydroxytoluene and 2,2,6,6‐tetramethyl‐1‐piperidinyloxy, as well as reported scorch protectants such as 2,4‐diphenyl‐4‐methyl pentene and 1,1‐diphenylethylene, lower crosslinking rates while suppressing the ultimate state of cure. In contrast, the acrylated nitroxyl, 4‐acryloyloxy‐2,2,6,6‐tetramethylpiperidine‐ N ‐oxyl (AOTEMPO) is shown to suppress the onset of LLDPE crosslinking entirely, while having little effect on the thermoset's final storage modulus. Moreover, AOTEMPO proved capable of quenching allylic macroradical intermediates in cis ‐1,4‐polyisoprene cure formulations, whereas other classes of scorch protecting additives had little effect on crosslinking dynamics and yields. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 54:2645–2653, 2014. © 2013 Society of Plastics Engineers
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".