Noncovalent compatibilization of polypropylene/MWCNT composites using an amino‐pyridine grafted polypropylene matrix
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polypropylene (PP)/multiwalled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) composites are prepared by implementing noncovalent compatibilization. The compatibilization method involves PP matrix functionalization with pyridine (Py) aromatic moieties, which are capable of π–π interaction with MWCNT sidewalls. Imaging revealed that the addition of 25 wt% of PP‐g‐Py to neat PP is capable of drastically reducing nanotube aggregate size and amount, compared to a matrix containing the equivalent amount of a maleated PP (PP‐g‐MA). Raman spectroscopy confirms improved polymer/nanotube interaction with the PP‐g‐Py matrix. The electrical percolation threshold appears at a MWCNT loading of approximately 1.2 wt%, and the maximum value of the electrical conductivity achieved is 10−2 S/m, irrespective of the functionalization procedure. The modulus of the composites is improved with the addition of MWCNTs. Furthermore, composites functionalized with Py display significant improvements in composite ductility compared with their maleated counterparts because of the improved filler dispersion. POLYM. COMPOS., 37:2794–2802, 2016. © 2015 Society of Plastics Engineers
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".