Isothermal and non‐isothermal crystallization behavior of PET nanocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)/clay nanocomposites (PCNs) containing 1 wt% Cloisite 30B (C30B) were prepared via melt compounding. Modulated differential scanning calorimetry (MDSC) for isothermally crystallized samples revealed that the third endotherm at the highest temperature may be attributed to the recrystalization and melting of crystals, reorganized during heating. The first and second endotherms may be associated with melting of the secondary and primary crystals, respectively. The overall isothermal crystallization rate in PCNs was faster than in the neat resin. Growth kinetics revealed that the work required for chain folding and the equilibrium melting temperature in PCNs were somewhat higher than for neat PET. During isothermal crystallization, the steric hurdles introduced by clay layers lead to a reduction in the transport of the PET chains into crystallites. The effective non‐isothermal activation energy for the PCNs was higher than for PET, possibly leading to less perfect crystals in the PCNs. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2012. © 2011 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) | 0.000 | 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".