Dielectric Properties of PE/Clay Nanocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polyethylene/nanoclay specimens containing from 0 to 5% nanoclays were prepared from a commercially available premixed PE/nanoclay masterbatch containing 50% wt of nanoclay. The masterbatch was diluted to the desired concentration by adding PE along with various amounts of compatibilizer in order to achieve the best possible dispersion of the nanoclay platelets. The dielectric response of the compounded samples was investigated using a combination of time and frequency‐domain spectroscopy in order to cover a wide frequency window. Both techniques were in good agreement when the time‐domain data was transformed into frequency‐domain data. Despite their low concentration, the addition of the dispersed nanoclays led to a significant alteration of the material dielectric response in the form of the appearance of various interfacial relaxation processes and an increase of charge carrier transport within the insulation material. Moreover, an onset of nonlinear charge transport process was observed at moderate fields for specimens containing a relatively low level of nanoclays. The high‐field breakdown strength was shown to have been improved by the incorporation of the nanoparticles, particularly when the exfoliation was enhanced by the use of a maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene compatibilizer.
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".