Effect of Blending Temperature on the Characteristics of Modified Polyacrylonitrie Homopolymer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the modification of polyacrylonitrile (PAN) homopolymer by a blending technique. The discussion on this modified PAN fiber involves the comparison a new concept of comonomer attachment compared to the conventional method. The PAN homopolymer and comonomers (i.e. itaconic acid (IA) and methylacrylate (MA)) were dissolved in dimethylformamide (DMF) at two different temperatures; 70°C (Type 1) and ambient temperature (Type 2). These fibers were fabricated using a simple the dry/wet spinning process before subjected to a stabilization process. FTIR result shows that the peaks (around 1600cm-1) indicated that the comonomers in Type 1 fiber were attached to the PAN homopolymer backbone during the dope preparation step. However for Type 2 fibers, the comonomers were only attached to the PAN homopolymer backbone during the stabilization process. Type 1 fibers also have higher weight loss and faster stabilization compared to Type 2 fibers. Therefore, the blending process at heat temperature of 70ºC is claimed as the technique that can modify the PAN homopolymer and make the stabilization process of PAN fibers faster.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".