Physicochemical and nanomechanical investigation of electrodeposited chitosan:PEO blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cathodic electrodeposition is a bottom up process that is emerging as a simple yet efficient strategy to engineer thin polymeric films with well-defined physicochemical properties. In particular, this technique offers the distinctive advantage of an easy control over composition, thickness, and morphology of the films by simply adjusting treatment parameters. In this work, cathodic electrodeposition was exploited to engender blends composed by chitosan (CH) and poly-ethylene-oxide (PEO) with different weight ratios. The physicochemical and nanomechanical properties of the resulting films were successively characterized by integrating Raman and Fourier-transform infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy with Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). Our findings demonstrate that electro-deposition is an effective technique for the co-deposition of CH:PEO blends. Moreover, spectroscopic and AFM analyses correlated the physicochemical (i.e. structural organization, bond formation and cross-linking) and nanomechanical properties of the blends to the PEO content, ultimately unveiling the molecular interactions and mechanisms involved in the cathodic deposition of CH:PEO films.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".