Electrically Conductive Poly(<scp>DL</scp>‐lactide)/Chitosan/Polypyrrole Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Summary: The fabrication of novel conductive poly( DL ‐lactide)/chitosan/polypyrrole complex membranes is reported. Using poly( DL ‐lactide)/chitosan blends as matrices and polypyrrole as a conductive component, several kinds of membranes with various compositions are prepared. A percolation threshold of polypyrrole as low as 1.8 wt.‐% is achieved for some membranes by controlling the chitosan proportion between 40 and 50 wt.‐%. SEM images exhibit that the membranes with a low percolation threshold show a two‐phase structure which consists of poly( DL ‐lactide) and chitosan phases. Dielectric measurements indicate that there is limited miscibility between the poly( DL ‐lactide) and chitosan but polypyrrole is nearly immiscible with the other two components. Based on the structural characteristics of the membranes, the polypyrrole particles are suggested to be localized at the interface between two phases. Dependence of conductivity of complex membranes on the PPy content. (○) PDLLA/PPy, (▪) PDLLA/ch(10)/PPy, (▵) PDLLA/ch(20)/PPy, (•) PDLLA/ch(30)/PPy, (□) PDLLA/ch(40)/PPy, and (▴) PDLLA/ch(50)‐PPy. magnified image Dependence of conductivity of complex membranes on the PPy content. (○) PDLLA/PPy, (▪) PDLLA/ch(10)/PPy, (▵) PDLLA/ch(20)/PPy, (•) PDLLA/ch(30)/PPy, (□) PDLLA/ch(40)/PPy, and (▴) PDLLA/ch(50)‐PPy.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".