Living radical emulsion polymerization using the nanoprecipitation technique: An extension to atom transfer radical polymerization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Living radical polymerizations of styrene were performed under emulsion atom transfer radical polymerization conditions with latexes prepared by a nanoprecipitation technique recently developed for the stable free‐radical polymerization process. Latexes were prepared by the precipitation of a solution of low‐molecular‐weight polystyrene in acetone into a solution of a surfactant in water. The resulting particles were swollen with styrene and then heated. The effects of various surfactants and hydrophobic ligands, the reaction temperature, and the ligand/copper(I) bromide ratio were studied. The best results were obtained with the nonionic surfactant Brij 98 in combination with the hydrophobic ligand N,N‐bis(2‐pyridylmethyl)octadecylamine and a ligand/copper(I) bromide ratio of 1.5 at a reaction temperature of 85–90 °C. Under these conditions, latexes with good colloidal stability with average particle diameters of 200 nm were obtained. The molecular weight distributions of the polystyrenes were narrow, although the experimental molecular weights were slightly larger than the theoretical ones because not all the macroinitiator appeared to reinitiate. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part A: Polym Chem 44: 4027–4038, 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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".