Synthesis of nanosized ethylene–propylene rubber latex via polyisoprene hydrogenation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nanosized ethylene–propylene rubber (EPM) latex with a particle size of 47 nm was synthesized via an alternative route consisting of isoprene (IP) polymerization followed by hydrogenation. First, the IP monomer was polymerized by differential microemulsion polymerization to obtain polyisoprene (PIP) rubber latex with a particle size of 42 nm. The structure of synthetic PIP was hydrogenated at the carbon–carbon double bonds to produce an ethylene–propylene copolymer by diimide reduction in the presence of hydrazine and hydrogen peroxide using boric acid as promotor. The degree of hydrogenation was determined by proton nuclear magnetic resonance ( 1 H‐NMR) spectroscopy and the structure of the ethylene–propylene copolymer was identified by 13 C‐NMR spectroscopy. In nanosized PIP hydrogenation, the hydrogenation level was found to be increased by boric acid addition. An EPM yield of 94% was achieved using a hydrogen peroxide : hydrazine ratio of 1.5 : 1. The EPM produced from PIP has high thermal stability with the maximum decomposition temperature of 510°C and a glass transition temperature of ‐42.4°C close to commercial ethylene–propylene diene rubber. Dynamic mechanical analysis indicated that EPM had a maximum storage modulus due to the saturated carbons domains of the ethylene segments in the polymer chains. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".