Water‐soluble polymers and gels from the polycondensation between cyclodextrins and poly(carboxylic acid)s: A study of the preparation parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Native cyclodextrins (CDx) and some of their derivatives were reacted with poly(carboxylic acid)s (PCAs) [citric acid (CTR), 1,2,3,4‐butanetetracarboxylic acid (BTCA), and poly(acrylic acid) (PAA)]. These reactions were carried out in the dry state at a temperature greater than 140°C in air or in vacuo. They resulted in water‐soluble and insoluble polymers formed by polyesterification between CDx and PCA. In this study, the parameters of the reaction were studied, and their influence on the water solubility or swellability of the obtained polymers was investigated. High reaction temperatures, high PCA/CDx molar ratios, and long reaction times preferably yielded insoluble gels, whereas softer conditions resulted in very soluble polymers. The gels could swell up to 10 times their initial volume in water, and the water‐soluble fraction had a solubility of 1 g/mL. A reaction mechanism was proposed that required the use of PCA carrying at least three neighboring carboxylic groups (CTR, BTCA, and PAA), and it was confirmed experimentally by the unsuccessful use of some dicarboxylic acids. A preliminary characterization by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and size exclusion chromatography was also conducted. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 97: 433–442, 2005
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) | 0.001 | 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".