Effect of poly(styrene‐<i>co</i>‐maleic anhydride) imidization on the miscibility and phase‐separation temperatures of poly(styrene‐<i>co</i>‐maleic anhydride)/poly(vinyl methyl ether) and poly(styrene‐<i>co</i>‐maleic anhydride)/ poly(methyl methacrylate) blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objective of this work was to study the miscibility and phase‐separation temperatures of poly(styrene‐co‐maleic anhydride) (SMA)/poly(vinyl methyl ether) (PVME) and SMA/poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) blends with differential scanning calorimetry and small‐angle light scattering techniques. We focused on the effect of SMA partial imidization with aniline on the miscibility and phase‐separation temperatures of these blends. The SMA imidization reaction led to a partially imidized styrene N‐phenyl succinimide copolymer (SMI) with a degree of conversion of 49% and a decomposition temperature higher than that of SMA by about 20°C. We observed that both SMI/PVME and SMI/PMMA blends had lower critical solution temperature behavior. The imidization of SMA increased the phase‐separation temperature of the SMA/PVME blend and decreased that of the SMA/PMMA blend. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".