Elongational rheology of biodegradable poly(lactic acid)/poly[(butylene succinate)‐<i>co</i>‐adipate] binary blends and poly(lactic acid)/poly[(butylene succinate)‐<i>co</i>‐adipate]/clay ternary nanocomposites
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A series of blends based on poly(lactic acid) (PLA) and poly[(butylene succinate)‐ co ‐adipate] (PBSA) as well as their nanocomposites with nanoclay (PLA/PBSA/Clay ternary nanocomposites) were prepared using the twin‐screw extruder. The blends were prepared for PBSA contents ranging from 25 to 75 wt % and their corresponding nanocomposites were prepared at a single‐clay concentration. The morphology and structure of the blends and the nanocomposites were examined using field emission scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, and X‐ray diffraction. Rheological properties (dynamic oscillatory shear measurements and elongational viscosities) of the blends, nanocomposites, and pure components were studied in detail. The strain hardening intensity of different blends and nanocomposites was compared with the behavior of the pure components. Strong strain hardening behavior was observed for blends composed of 50 wt % and higher PBSA content. However, the effect of PBSA content on the elongational viscosity was less pronounced in PLA/PBSA/Clay ternary nanocomposites. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it