RAFT Polymerization Kinetics of a-Methylbenzyl Methacryalte by Dilatometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work is present a comparative study of the reversible addition–fragmentation chain transfer and free radical polymerizations of ?-methylbenzyl methacrylate (a-MBM) in solution at 70 °C using 1-phenylehtyldithiobenzoate (1-PEDB) as RAFT agent and AIBN as thermal initiator. Reactions were monitored by dilatometry, which is a robust and economical technique to follow kinetic polymerization. Free radical polymerizations were carried out at initial monomer concentration [a-MBM]0 of 0.2, 0.5, 0.7 and 1.0 M at fixed [AIBN]0 = 1 x 10-3 M and initial initiator concentration of 2, 5, 8 and 10 x 10-3 M at fixed [a-MBM]0 = 0.5 M. For the RAFT polymerizations the [1-PEDB]0 was 4 x 10-3 M using the same reaction conditions that in the free radical polymerizations. In RAFT polymerizations it was found that conversion profiles were lower than in free radical polymerization. Plots of conversion vs time indicated that the polymerizations followed first order kinetics in the range of [a-MBM]0 evaluated. However, only at low [AIBN]0, i.e. 2 and 5 x 10-3 M, kinetics fitted adequately in the reaction time tested. 1H NMR, IR, and UV-Vis spectrophotometric studies confirmed the presence of thiocarbonylthio moieties (-SCS-) in the polymer chains. Molecular weight data for the set of experiments carried out by free radical polymerization decreased when the monomer or the initiator concentration increased. The molecular weight distributions (MWDs) corresponding to the polymers obtained in the RAFT polymerizations were moderately narrow with polydispersities (D) between 1.12 and 1.59.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".