MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026564817 · doi:10.3109/02652048.2014.950711

Microencapsulation by interfacial polymerisation: membrane formation and structure

2014· review· en· W2026564817 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Microencapsulation · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonomerPolymerizationMaterials scienceChemical engineeringDispersion (optics)MembranePhase (matter)Interfacial polymerizationPolymerPolymer sciencePolymer chemistryNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryComposite materialChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interfacial polymerisation was mainly developed toward the end of the 1960s, leading to applications in microcapsule production by the mid-1970s. The process consists in the dispersion of one phase containing a reactive monomer, into a second immiscible phase to which is added a second monomer. Both monomers react at the droplet surface (interface), forming a polymeric membrane. Over the last 50 years, many studies have been reported, but very few have provided a comprehensive review of this technology. This contribution reviews microcapsule production by interfacial polymerisation from the chemical, physico-chemical and physical perspectives, providing a tool for understanding and mastering this production technology, but also providing guidance toward improvements for future process design.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it