MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083964358 · doi:10.1021/ma2007078

Osmotic Interactions, Rheology, and Arrested Phase Separation of Star–Linear Polymer Mixtures

2011· article· en· W2083964358 on OpenAlexaff
Domenico Truzzolillo, Dimitris Vlassopoulos, Mario Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Dynamics and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRheologyPolymerPhase (matter)Materials scienceColloidStar polymerPhase diagramPolymer chemistryChemical engineeringThermodynamicsChemical physicsChemistryComposite materialPhysicsOrganic chemistryCopolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting from a glassy suspension of star polymers in molecular solvent, we add linear homopolymer with a fixed size ratio and ever increasing concentration, hence diluting the glass and eventually approaching the regime of stars in polymer matrix. We show that we can quantitatively decompose the rheology of the mixtures into colloidal star and linear polymer contributions by accounting for the osmotic shrinkage of the stars due to the added polymers. We also estimate the effective star overlap concentration in the mixtures and show how the rheological properties change at the crossover concentration, where the number of star-particle contacts decreases and the star repulsions weaken and eventually become attractive upon increasing the linear polymer concentration. The attraction is accompanied by a phase separation, pointing to the presence of unstable regions in the star/linear polymer phase diagram, where gelation results from an arrested phase separation. The crossover concentration is also probed by nonlinear rheological measurements. These findings are of generic nature for soft colloidal mixtures and suggest guidelines for tailoring their rheology and phase/state behavior.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicMaterial Dynamics and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207