Manipulating Latex Polymer Microstructure Using Chain Transfer Agent and Cross‐Linker to Modify PSA Performance and Viscoelasticit<b>y</b>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two series of butyl acrylate (BA)/acrylic acid (AA)/2‐hydroxy ethyl methacrylate latexes were produced via starved seeded semi‐batch emulsion polymerization. The first series, five latexes with gel contents ranging from 0 to 75 wt.‐%, were generated by varying the amount of chain transfer agent (CTA, n‐dodecyl mercaptan) in the absence of cross‐linker. The second series, two latexes with gel contents of 49 and 74 wt.‐%, were obtained by manipulating the amount of CTA in the presence of a constant cross‐linker (allyl methacrylate) concentration. Latexes with similar gel contents, one from each series, were compared with respect to their microstructure, viscoelastic properties and pressure‐sensitive adhesive performance. At similar gel contents, latexes obtained in the absence of cross‐linker had larger sol polymer molecular weight ($\overline {M} _{{\rm w}} $ ) and molecular weight between cross‐linking points (Mc), compared to the latexes generated using both CTA and cross‐linker. The different microstructures of latexes with similar gel contents resulted in significantly different viscoelastic properties and shear strength of the pressure‐sensitive adhesive films cast from the latexes. magnified image
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".