Cross-Linking, Miscibility, and Interface Structure in Blends of Poly(2-ethylhexyl methacrylate) Copolymers. An Energy Transfer Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe the miscibility of blends involving poly(ethylhexyl methacrylate) [PEHMA] latex copolymers using the direct nonradiative energy transfer (DET) technique. When the polymers in both components of a blend are PEHMA homopolymers, we obtain a fully mixed film. When one of the components in the blend is replaced with a PEHMA copolymer containing 5 mol % tert -butylcarbodiimidoethyl methacrylate (tBCEMA), we also obtain a fully mixed film. However, if a PEHMA copolymer containing 11 mol % methacrylic acid (MAA) is mixed with PEHMA homopolymer, the miscibility between the polymers is limited and is reduced further when the amount of MAA is increased to 20 mol %. Using a distribution model for energy transfer, we were able to determine the evolution of the interface thickness with annealing time. The maximum interface thickness attained in these blends decreases from δ = 15 nm to δ = 8 nm when the content of MAA in the blends increases from 11 mol % to 20 mol %. A freshly formed solvent-cast film prepared from a 1:1 blend of the PEHMA copolymer containing 11 mol % MAA and the PEHMA copolymer containing 5 mol % tBCEMA exhibits some polymer segregation. This persists in the solid film when the film is annealed for short times (20 min) at 60 °C. Over longer times, mixing of the copolymers occurs and reaches completion. We attribute this increase in miscibility to the formation of graft copolymer, which serves as a compatibilizing agent, through the reaction between the −COOH and −N C C− groups. When a film of the same composition is prepared from a blend of the two latex dispersions and annealed, a fully mixed film also results.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".