MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990727453 · doi:10.1002/polb.10018

Crystal growth rate in ultrathin films of poly(ethylene oxide)

2001· article· en· W1990727453 on OpenAlexaff
Kari Dalnoki‐Veress, James A. Forrest, Michael V. Massa, Andrew Pratt, Adrian C. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer crystallization and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuartz crystal microbalanceCrystallinityMaterials scienceThin filmCrystal (programming language)Amorphous solidCrystallizationPolymerOxideEthylene oxideCrystal growthMelting pointChemical engineeringDiffusionPolymer chemistryCrystallographyComposite materialNanotechnologyChemistryPhysical chemistryThermodynamicsCopolymerAdsorptionMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many dynamical properties of polymers, including segmental relaxation and chain diffusion, exhibit anomalies in thin‐film samples. We extend the studies of thin‐film dynamics to the case of semicrystalline polymers and present a study of the crystal growth rate for thin films of poly(ethylene oxide). We used optical microscopy and quartz crystal microbalance techniques to characterize the kinetics of crystallization for films with thicknesses from 40 to 1000 nm for a range of temperatures near the melting point. A remarkable slowing down of the crystal growth is observed at all temperatures studied for films with a thickness of less than ∼100 nm. The results can be used to suggest reductions of the mobility of chains at the crystal/amorphous interface. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 39: 2615–2621, 2001

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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations59
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer PhysicsSame topicPolymer crystallization and propertiesFrench-language works237,207