Size exclusion chromatography does not require pores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Separation of macromolecules on the basis of their molecular weight by size exclusion chromatography has long been considered to be caused by the geometry-dependent partition of macromolecules between a continuous phase and the porous interior of a gel or cross-linked bead. The volume of a pore accessible to a solute is limited by its relative dimensions, so larger molecules will have access to a smaller volume and will remain in a bead for a shorter time than smaller solutes. Our recent alternate picture proposes that the partition coefficient can be calculated from a thermodynamic model for the free energy of mixing of the solute with the gel phase. Size-dependent exclusion caused by the unfavorable entropy of mixing associated with the partition is predicted; the magnitude of the effect is modified by enthalpic interactions between the solute and the gel phase. This concept is extended here to describe the partition of macromolecules into a layer of terminally attached polymer chains grafted onto a solid bead. Both simple mean field and self-consistent field theory calculations predict size-dependent entropic exclusion. Experimental results obtained with neutral polymer chains grafted onto solid polystyrene latex beads confirm the predictions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.013 |
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".