Degradation studies on biodegradable nanocomposite based on polycaprolactone/polycarbonate (80:20%) polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of biocompatible polymers has greatly advanced the field of tissue engineering. Some tissues can be propagated on a nondegradable scaffold. Tissue such as cartilage, however, is a complex tissue in which the chondrocytes require their own synthesized extracellular matrix (ECM) to function. Suitable scaffolds for tissue engineering cartilage should provide mechanical strength and degrade at a similar rate to that of cell growth and ECM production. We have developed a biodegradable nanocomposite based on polycaprolactone and polycarbonate polyurethane (PCU) with an incorporated polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane (POSS) (POSS modified Poly(caprolactone/carbonate) urethane/urea). Previous work on POSS incorporated into PCU (POSS-PCU) has been shown to possess good mechanical strength, elasticity and resistance to degradation. This series of experiments involved exposing this polymer to a selection of accelerated degradative solutions for up to 8 weeks. The samples were analyzed by infra-red spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, X-ray microanalysis, contact angle analysis, and stress-strain mechanical analysis. Degradation of hard and soft segments of the nanocomposite was evident by infra-red spectroscopy in all conditioned samples. POSS nanocage degradation was evident in some oxidative/peroxidative systems accompanied by gross changes in surface topography and significant changes in mechanical properties. The hydrophobic polymer became more hydrophilic in all conditions. This biodegradable nanocomposite demonstrated steady degradation with protection of mechanical properties when exposed to hydrolytic enzymes and plasma protein fractions and exhibited more dramatic degradation by oxidation.This pattern may be potentially employed in tissue engineering scaffolds where controlled degradation and retained structural stability of the scaffold is required.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".