A preliminary study of the degradation of cyanoacrylate adhesives in the presence and absence of fossil material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fossils are frequently conserved with cyanoacrylate (CA) adhesives, which have never been scientifically assessed for their long-term stability and suitability for this application. The degradation of three types of CA adhesives were studied: an ethyl CA, an ethyl CA with added poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), and a butyl CA, in the presence and absence of five different fossils obtained from various sites. The fossils were characterized by pH, moisture content, porosity, and ash content, as well as by their mineral and elemental composition. Hydrolytic degradation of polymerized CA adhesives was monitored by quantitative determination of formaldehyde, one of the degradation products. Both in the presence and absence of a fossil, butyl CA degraded more slowly than ethyl CA, making it attractive for fossil applications. It was also found that acidic fossil inhibits the degradation of CA adhesives, while neutral or alkaline fossils increase the CA degradation. The CA degradation appears to be correlated to some degree with a fossil's physical and chemical properties, but this requires further study. Further study is also necessary to determine how the observed CA degradation affects the actual fossil/CA bond strength.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".