Thermal stability of brominated poly(isobutylene‐<i>co</i>‐isoprene)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The thermal stability of brominated isobutylene–isoprene rubber (BIIR) was investigated through studies of the elastomer and a model compound that accurately represented the reactive functionality within the polymer. An analysis of commercial BIIR and reaction products of brominated 2,2,4,8,8‐pentamethyl‐4‐nonene (BPMN) by NMR demonstrated that bromination of isobutylene–isoprene rubber by 1,3‐dibromo‐5,5‐dimethylhydantoin yielded a kinetically favored exomethylene substitution product, 3‐bromo‐6,6‐dimethyl‐2‐(2,2‐dimethylpropyl)‐1‐heptene (2), as opposed to the more stable endo‐isomer, (E,Z)‐4‐(bromomethyl)‐2,2,8,8‐tetramethyl‐4‐nonene (3). The exposure of BIIR and the brominated model compound BPMN to vulcanization temperatures led to the isomerization of 2 to 3 at a rate strongly dependent on HBr concentration. The elimination of HBr from these allylic bromides to produce exo‐ and endo‐conjugated dienes proceeded concurrently with isomerization, and the kinetics of these processes could be rationalized on the basis of a polar reaction mechanism. The product distributions obtained from both the model system and BIIR were consistent, thereby justifying an extension of the model compound approach to an analysis of BIIR vulcanization chemistry. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Polym Sci Part A: Polym Chem 39: 2019–2026, 2001
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".