MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004997056 · doi:10.1021/ma011743n

Nanostructured Polymer Films with Liquid Inclusions. 2. Material Morphology and Properties

2002· article· en· W2004997056 on OpenAlexaff
Olga Kalinina, Eugenia Kumacheva

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerMaterials scienceGlass transitionAnnealing (glass)NanocompositeChemical engineeringShell (structure)BilayerNanoparticleComposite materialCore (optical fiber)Polymer chemistryNanotechnologyChemistryMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-layer core−shell latex particles with fluid cores were used for the preparation of a polymeric nanostructured material. The fluid cores were synthesized from the low glass transition temperature core-forming polymer (CFP) covalently labeled with a fluorescent dye. The CFP was encapsulated with a thin rigid shell of shell-forming polymer 1 (SFP-1). The second shell was synthesized from the shell-forming polymer 2 (SFP-2) on the surface of the bilayer particles. The specific relationship between the glass transition temperatures, T g 's, of the polymers incorporated into the core−shell particles was T g (CFP) < T g (SFP-2) < T g (SFP-1). Nanocomposite polymeric films were obtained following heat processing of the arrays of core−shell particles at annealing temperature, T g (SFP-2) < T ann < T g (SFP-1). The morphology of the nanostructured material was studied by examining the distribution of the fluorescent dye in the polymer film. Various factors providing sharp modulation in optical properties of the composite films were examined and discussed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207