Block copolymer preparation by atom transfer radical polymerization under emulsion conditions using a nanoprecipitation technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Living‐radical polymerization of acrylates were performed under emulsion atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP) conditions using latexes prepared by a nanoprecipitation technique previously employed and optimized for the polymerization of styrene. A macroinitiator of poly(n‐butyl acrylate) prepared under bulk ATRP was dissolved in acetone and precipitated in an aqueous solution of Brij 98 to preform latex particles, which were then swollen with monomer and heated. Various monomers (i.e. n‐butyl acrylate, styrene, and tert‐butyl acrylate) were used to swell the particles to prepare homo‐ and block copolymers from the poly(n‐butyl acrylate) macroinitiator. Under these conditions latexes with a relatively good colloidal stability were obtained. Furthermore, amphiphilic block copolymers were prepared by hydrolysis of the tert‐butyl groups and the resulting block copolymers were characterized by dynamic light scattering (DLS) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The bulk morphologies of the polystyrene‐b‐poly(n‐butyl acrylate) and poly(n‐butyl acrylate)‐b‐poly(acrylic acid) copolymers were investigated by atomic force microscopy (AFM) and small angle X‐ray scattering (SAXS). © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part A: Polym Chem 46: 625–635, 2008
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".