A Preliminary Study of the Relationship between Lewis Acid–Base Parameters and Structure of Polymers
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
Acid–base theory is an important method to describe the interaction between materials. The inverse gas chromatography (IGC) technique can be used to measure the surface Lewis acid–base parameters of materials. Compared with the solubility parameter method, the merit of the IGC technique is that it can give the surface acid–base properties of many undissolvable materials, such as inorganic materials, metal‐oxides, and thermosetting polymers. In this paper, six polymers are chosen to discuss the rationality of their Lewis acid–base parameters from the molecular structure viewpoint. Compared with some small molecules, the values of these polymers are reasonable. However, endowing each group with a set of acid–base parameters is impossible at this stage because of the lack of sufficient data. Thus more characterization work is needed to develop the IGC method. Keywords: Lewis acid–base parametersinverse gas chromatographypolymer composites Acknowledgment The author acknowledges the support of the Special Fund for the Science & Technology Innovative Talents of Harbin (RC2006QN015002).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it