MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999594667 · doi:10.1002/app.24868

Extrusion of microcellular open‐cell LDPE‐based sheet foams

2006· article· en· W1999594667 on OpenAlex
Patrick Lee, Jin Wang, Chul B. Park

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Polymer Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialLow-density polyethyleneBlowing agentExtrusionPolyethylenePolystyreneCell sizeExpansion ratioPhase (matter)Protein filamentPolymerPolyurethaneChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this research, highly open‐cell low‐density polyethylene sheet foams are achieved with an annular die by applying various strategies for cell opening, i.e., (i) creation of a structural nonhomogeneity consisting of hard and soft regions with partial crosslinking, (ii) blending of a hard second‐phase material (i.e., polystyrene phase) into the low‐density polyethylene matrix, (iii) plasticization of the soft region with a secondary blowing agent, (iv) decrease of the cell wall thickness by increasing the cell density, and (v) decrease of the cell wall thickness by increasing the expansion ratio while cell walls are soft. Although the higher surface‐to‐volume ratio of the sheet foams compared with filament foams made it challenging to prevent gas loss, highly open‐cell (up to 99%) and microcellular (up to 3.5 × 10 10 cells/cm 3 ) foam sheets were successfully manufactured with high‐pressure annular dies using the cell‐opening strategies. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 102:3376–3384, 2006

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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