MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087094145 · doi:10.1002/pen.21283

The effect of injection molding conditions on the morphology of polymer structural foams

2009· article· en· W2087094145 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Engineering and Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlowing agentMaterials scienceTaguchi methodsMolding (decorative)MoldComposite materialPolymerDesign of experimentsMorphology (biology)Cell sizeFoaming agentOrthogonal arrayPolyurethane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study investigates the relations between processing conditions and morphology of injection molded structural foams. The samples were produced by adjusting five process parameters (blowing agent concentration, mold temperature, melt temperature, injection pressure, and back pressure) at four different levels. The experiments were based on the design of experiments (DOE) analysis with a Taguchi method, and the results were used to determine the optimum conditions to produce high quality foams in terms of low skin thickness, small cell sizes, and narrow cell size distribution combined with low foam density and high cell density. The conclusions revealed that blowing agent concentration and injection pressure were the most influential factors. Using the optimum conditions predicted from the DOE, a validation test was performed and confirmed the results. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2009. © 2009 Society of Plastics Engineers

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 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.219 · 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