MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068944547 · doi:10.1002/polb.23522

Effect of biopolymer blends on physical and Acoustical properties of biocomposite foams

2014· article· en· W2068944547 on OpenAlexaff
Shahrzad Ghaffari Mosanenzadeh, Hani E. Naguib, Chul B. Park, Noureddine Atalla

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
Topicbiodegradable polymer synthesis and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialBiocompositePolymerPetrochemicalBiopolymerRheologyAbsorption of waterPolyhydroxyalkanoatesComposite numberPolymer blendPolypropylenePolymer scienceCopolymerChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Bio‐based foams are the solution to environmental concerns raised by petrochemical‐based open cell foams used in various industries for sound absorption. While conventional petrochemical‐based polymers take centuries to degrade or may not degrade at all, bio‐based polymers decompose to biomass, water, and carbon dioxide in a matter of months when exposed to proper environment. To increase the potential of replacing current petrochemical foams, mechanical as well as acoustic characteristics of bio‐based foams need to be improved. This article studies the effect of blending two bio‐based polymers and physics of the blends on acoustic and mechanical properties of resulting polymer composite foams. Different blends of polylactide with three grades of polyhydroxyalkanoates were foamed and characterized based on acoustic and mechanical performance. Rheological properties of pure polymers as well as their blends were studied and effect of polymer blends on acoustic absorption of the resulting foams was investigated. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 2014 , 52 , 1002–1013

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer PhysicsSame topicbiodegradable polymer synthesis and propertiesFrench-language works237,207