MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004601044 · doi:10.1002/mats.200350027

Evolution of Molecular Weight and Long Chain Branch Distributions in Olefin–Diene Copolymerization

2003· article· en· W2004601044 on OpenAlexaff
Márcio Nele, João B. P. Soares, José Carlos Pinto

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Theory and Simulations · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispersityPolymerizationMolar mass distributionDieneBranching (polymer chemistry)Chain transferPolymer chemistryPolymerCopolymerChemistryKinetic chain lengthRadical polymerizationOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A model for olefin–diene copolymerization and long chain branch formation was developed. The model shows that the number‐average molecular weight and branching density increases linearly with time in a semi‐batch polymerization, while the polydispersity depends on the diene content in the polymer and on the polymerization time. For low diene fractions or low polymerization times, the polydispersity increases linearly with time. For higher diene contents, the polydispersity increases exponentially with polymerization time after a critical polymer concentration is reached. The calculated distributions of branched species indicate that diene content influences the amount of highly branched chains produced in the polymerization, markedly broadening the distribution of molecular weight and leading to gel formation. Weight distribution of branched species after 30 min of polymerization. magnified image Weight distribution of branched species after 30 min of polymerization.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromolecular Theory and SimulationsSame topicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207