Ionic conductivity and related properties of crosslinked chitosan membranes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Crosslinked chitosan membranes were prepared with a relatively low degree of crosslinking with epichlorohydrin and glutaraldehyde as crosslinking agents under heterogeneous and homogeneous conditions, respectively. The tensile properties, crystallinity, swelling index, and ionic conductivity of the crosslinked membranes were investigated. A significant decrease in the crystallinity and a large change in the swelling ratio of the crosslinked membrane were observed. In comparison with the uncrosslinked chitosan membrane, when the chitosan membrane was crosslinked with an appropriate degree of crosslinking under homogeneous conditions, its ionic conductivity after hydration for 1 h at room temperature increased by about one order of magnitude. In addition, with a lower concentration of the crosslinking agent, the tensile strength and breaking elongation of the crosslinked membrane were almost unchanged. Moreover, up to a critical value, the tensile strength of the membrane increased gradually, and the breaking elongation decreased slowly. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 89: 306–317, 2003
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".