MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1990585982 · doi:10.3139/217.2039

Functionalization of PP with Sulfonyl Azide through Reactive Processing

2007· article· en· W1990585982 on OpenAlexaff
Q. Li, Costas Tzoganakis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Polymer Processing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzideGraftingSulfonylSurface modificationMaterials scienceFourier transform infrared spectroscopyAdhesiveX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyPolypropylenePolymer chemistryChemical engineeringNuclear chemistryComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistryPolymerAlkyl

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The functionalization of polypropylene (PP) by 4-carboxybenzene sulfonyl azide (CBSA) was investigated in a batch mixer and the reaction was monitored through FTIR, 1H-NMR and XPS spectroscopy. The degree of grafting was found to increase initially with azide feed content and subsequently to level off at azide concentrations of 2 wt.%. Experiments performed at different reaction temperatures showed that a maximum degree of grafting was obtained around 190°C. The linear viscoelastic properties the functionalized PPs were also evaluated by oscillatory shear measurements and were found to correlate with the grafting degree results. Finally, the adhesive properties of the functionalized PPs were evaluated through peel tests on aluminum substrates. The peel strength increased with the degree of grafting and it was found to be significantly higher for purified samples than for non-purified ones. Finally, it was demonstrated that the cooling rate of the PP/aluminum laminate specimens had a major effect on the peel strength.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Polymer Processing→Same topicFuel Cells and Related Materials→French-language works237,207→