MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adhesion of Fibers to Natural Rubber Elastomer using Ring-Opening Metathesis Polymerization (ROMP)

2002· article· en· W2063705502 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kenneth C. Caster, Russell D. Walls

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Synthesis & Catalysis · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthetic Organic Chemistry Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsROMPRing-opening metathesis polymerisationElastomerPolymerizationNatural rubberPolymerComposite materialMaterials scienceNorbornenePolymer chemistryAdhesionMetathesisChemistryPolymer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ring-opening metathesis polymerization is used to investigate adhesion of multifilament fibers (polyester, nylon, Kevlar®) to a natural rubber elastomer through the creation of ROMP polymer coatings on the fiber surfaces followed by encapsulation in pre-cured elastomer. Polymer coated fibers are prepared by 1) physisorption of polynorbornenes which are prepared by solution-phase ROMP and 2) contact metathesis polymerization (CMP) whereby Grubbs' 1st generation catalyst 1 is applied directly to the fiber surface followed by passage of the “activated” fiber through a norbornene monomer bath. Both methods improve adhesion to the elastomer when compared to uncoated control specimens. Catalyst and polymer loading are briefly examined. Although inconclusive, our findings suggest that polymer loading and substrate specificity may affect overall adhesion. ROMP is enabling chemistry for creating an interface to improve fiber adhesion to natural rubber elastomers. Formulated commercial adhesive systems are also included in this study.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Synthesis & CatalysisSame topicSynthetic Organic Chemistry MethodsFrench-language works237,207