2‐Naphthol‐containing β‐cyclodextrin–epichlorohydrin copolymers: synthesis, characterization and fluorescence studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fluorescent 2‐naphthol (NOH)‐containing β‐cyclodextrin (β‐CD)–epichlorohydrin (EP) copolymers were synthesized. Polymerization was confirmed through viscosity and FT‐IR spectroscopic measurements. Under certain conditions, the copolymers were water‐soluble (molar ratio of EP/β‐CD <22:1), while under other conditions water‐insoluble gels were formed (EP/β‐CD ≥ 22:1). Increase of the EP content to EP/β‐CD ≤ 39:1 increased the fluorescence intensity of the copolymer and shifted the emission maximum from 422 nm toward 352 nm (measured at pH ≥ 12). Further increases in the EP content resulted in a slight decrease in the fluorescence intensity. The fluorescence properties of our system at EP/β‐CD < 22 were sensitive to pH variation, while at EP/β‐CD ≥ 22 no pH effect was observed. These variations can be explained in terms of the exposure of the fluorophore to solvent in soluble versus insoluble polymers, as well as changes in the mode of association (host–guest complexation, trapping within the polymer network, covalent bonding, etc) of NOH with the polymers. Crystallographic studies on a single crystal grown in the absence of EP, but under basic conditions, suggest that host–guest complexation is not an important mode for NOH incorporation. Copyright © 2005 Society of Chemical Industry
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".