MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976430333 · doi:10.1002/macp.200390107

Critically Evaluated Rate Coefficients for Free‐Radical Polymerization, 4

2003· article· en· W1976430333 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Chemistry and Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerizationMonomerArrhenius equationCrystallographyChemistryGlycidyl methacrylateAnalytical Chemistry (journal)CombinatoricsPolymerPhysicsPhysical chemistryMathematicsActivation energyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Propagation rate coefficients, k p , which have been previously reported by several groups for free‐radical bulk polymerizations of cyclohexyl methacrylate (CHMA), glycidyl methacrylate (GMA), benzyl methacrylate (BzMA), and isobornyl methacrylate (iBoMA) are critically evaluated. All data were determined by the combination of pulsed‐laser polymerization (PLP) and subsequent polymer analysis by size‐exclusion chromatography (SEC). This so‐called PLP‐SEC technique has been recommended as the method of choice for the determination of k p by the IUPAC Working Party on Modeling of Polymerisation Kinetics and Processes . The present data fulfill consistency criteria and the agreement among the data from different laboratories is remarkable. The values for CHMA, GMA, and BzMA are therefore recommended as constituting benchmark data sets for each monomer. The data for iBoMA are also considered reliable, but since SEC calibration was established only by a single group, the data are not considered as a benchmark data set. All k p data for each monomer are best fitted by the following Arrhenius relations: CHMA: $k_{\rm p} = 10^{6.80} \;{\rm L} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} \cdot {\rm s}^{ - 1} \exp \left( {{{ - 23.0\;{\rm kJ} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} } \over {{\rm R} \cdot T}}} \right)$ , GMA: $k_{\rm p} = 10^{6.79} \;{\rm L} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} \cdot {\rm s}^{ - 1} \exp \left( {{{ - 22.9\;{\rm kJ} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} } \over {{\rm R} \cdot T}}} \right)$ , BzMA: $k_{\rm p} = 10^{6.83} \;{\rm L} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} \cdot {\rm s}^{ - 1} \exp \left( {{{ - 22.9\;{\rm kJ} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} } \over {{\rm R} \cdot T}}} \right)$ , iBoMA: $k_{\rm p} = 10^{6.79} \;{\rm L} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} \cdot {\rm s}^{ - 1} \exp \left( {{{ - 23.1\;{\rm kJ} \cdot {\rm mol}^{ - 1} } \over {{\rm R} \cdot T}}} \right)$ . Rather remarkably, for the methacrylates under investigation, the k p values are all very similar. Thus, all data can be fitted well by a single Arrhenius relation resulting in a pre‐exponential factor of 4.24 × 10 6 L · mol −1 · s −1 and an activation energy of 21.9 kJ · mol −1 . All activation parameters refer to bulk polymerizations at ambient pressure and temperatures below 100 °C. Joint confidence intervals are also provided, enabling values and uncertainties for k p to be estimated at any temperature. 95% joint confidence intervals for Arrhenius parameters A and E A for cyclohexyl (CHMA), glycidyl (GMA), benzyl (BzMA), and isobornyl (iBoMA) methacrylate; for details see text. magnified image 95% joint confidence intervals for Arrhenius parameters A and E A for cyclohexyl (CHMA), glycidyl (GMA), benzyl (BzMA), and isobornyl (iBoMA) methacrylate; for details see text.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.232 · 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