Thermal, morphological, and mechanical characterization of novel carbon nanofiber‐filled bismaleimide composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Novel carbon nanofiber (CNF) ‐filled bismalemide composites were fabricated by a thermokinetic mixing method. The thermal and mechanical properties of composites containing 1 wt % and 2 wt % CNFs were investigated. Thermogravimetric analysis demonstrated that minimal improvement in thermal stability of the nanocomposites was obtained by the addition of CNFs. Dynamic mechanical analysis showed an increase in storage modulus (E′) and glass transition temperature (Tg) upon incorporation of nanofibers. Limiting oxygen index (LOI) has also been found to increase with incorporation of CNFs. Morphological studies of fractured surfaces of the composites has been carried out by scanning electron microscopy to determine the effect of fiber content and dispersion on the failure mechanism. In general, good dispersion was observed, along with agglomeration at some points and some fiber matrix interfacial debonding. A decrease in mechanical strength has been observed and debonding was found as the main failure mechanism. Further research outlook is also presented. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2010
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".