Evaluating the behavior of castor‐oil‐based polyurethanes in acidic environments on the basis of the sorption behavior and analysis with electron ionization mass spectroscopy and neutron activation analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Castor‐oil‐based polyurethanes (COPUs) were fabricated from 2,4‐toluene diisocyanate and hexamethylene diisocyanate. Immersion weight‐gain methods at different temperatures were used to measure the sorption and diffusion of acidic solutions into the polyurethane. It was evident from this study that these COPUs can indeed be used in acid conditions as they exhibited a low absorption of diffusing solutions (<1%) with the apparent activation energies of diffusion and permeation estimated to be 85 and 18 kJ/mol, respectively. Neutron activation analysis confirmed the possibility of the clustering of the acidic diffusing solutions because the acid/water molar values within the polymer matrix were significantly larger than those expected of the bulk solution. Mass spectroscopy indicated that any degradation that may have occurred may have been the result of fracture at the ester bond in the castor oil segment of the polyurethane. Tensile tests showed that the modulus of the saturated polymers remained above the values of the unsaturated ones. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2011
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".