MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048853969 · doi:10.1080/15583724.2013.776586

Homogeneous Hydrogenation Art of Nitrile Butadiene Rubber: A Review

2013· review· en· W2048853969 on OpenAlexaff
Hui Wang, Lijuan Yang, Garry L. Rempel

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Reviews · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Nanocomposites and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolybutadieneNatural rubberMaterials scienceElastomerHomogeneousNitrile rubberCatalysisPolystyreneCopolymerPolymerHomogeneous catalysisPetrochemicalNitrilePolymer scienceChemical engineeringPolymer chemistryComposite materialOrganic chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogenation of nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR) is an important research topic in the field of chemical modification of unsaturated polymers. This review provides an overview of the fundamental data, challenges, and recent advances in the research area of homogeneous hydrogenation of NBR. Besides NBR and its hydrogenation product HNBR, some other important elastomers such as styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), polybutadiene rubber (BR), polystyrene-b-polybutadiene-b-polystyrene (SBS block copolymer), and natural rubber (NR) were also involved for the related hydrogenation reactions and characterization. A brief comparison of hydrogenation catalysts including the heterogeneous and homogeneous catalysts was first conducted and the importance of rhodium (Rh) complex catalysts for homogeneous hydrogenation of elastomers was addressed. This article continued to discuss the reaction pathways for realization of the homogeneous hydrogenation of NBR. This was followed by an examination of the microstructures and characterization techniques of NBR and HNBR. After that the recovery/recycle of precious metal catalysts from the reaction substrate, which have been drawing much attention from industrial manufacturers, was reviewed and highlighted in this article. The applications of HNBR were then summarized. In the end, future research directions were suggested.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations126
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer ReviewsSame topicPolymer Nanocomposites and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207