Grafting of Polycaprolactone on Oxidized Nanocelluloses by Click Chemistry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this work is the grafting of polycaprolactone diol (PCL) on the surface of oxidized nanocelluloses (ONC) in order to enhance the compatibility between the hydrophilic cellulose nanofibres and the hydrophobic polymer matrix. This grafting was successfully realized with a new strategy known as click chemistry. In this context, the oxidized nanocelluloses bearing alkyl groups (ONC-PR) were prepared by reacting amino groups of propargylamine (PR) with carboxyl groups of ONC. In parallel, PCL was converted into azido-polycaprolactone (PCL-N3) in two steps: (i) tosylation of polycaprolactone (PCL-OTs) and (ii) conversion of PCL-OTs into PCL-N3 by nucleophilic displacement using sodium azide. Finally, ONC-PR was reacted with PCL-N3 in heterogeneous conditions through click chemistry in order to prepare polycaprolactone grafted oxidized nanocellulose (ONC-g-PCL), which could be suitable for improving the interfacial adhesion in the composite materials. The grafted samples were characterized by transmission electron microscopy and by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and Carbon-13 nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (13C-NMR) spectroscopic techniques.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 it