Ionic conductivity and tensile properties of hydroxyethyl and hydroxypropyl chitosan membranes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hydroxyethyl chitosan and hydroxypropyl chitosan were prepared through the reaction of alkali‐chitosan with 2‐chloroethanol and propylene epoxide, respectively. Fourier transform infrared and 13C NMR measurements were made to examine the substitution on the chitosan unit. According to a comparison of the peak areas between the modified chitosan and unmodified chitosan and the integration of peak areas of 1H NMR spectra, for both modified chitosans, the maximum degree of substitution was less than 25%. The ionic conductivity and mechanical properties of modified chitosan membranes were investigated. In comparison with the unmodified chitosan membrane, hydrated hydroxyethyl and hydroxypropyl chitosan membranes with a higher degree of substitution showed an increase in ionic conductivity of about one order of magnitude; moreover, the crystallinity of hydroxyethyl and hydroxypropyl chitosan membranes was remarkably reduced, and their swelling indices increased significantly. However, these modified membranes did not exhibit significant changes in their tensile strength and breaking elongation. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 42: 1379–1397, 2004
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".