MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126282457 · doi:10.1002/app.20450

Factorial experimental design for grafting of vinyl monomers onto natural rubber latex

2004· article· en· W2126282457 on OpenAlexaff
Wanvimon Arayapranee, Garry L. Rempel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Polymer Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Nanocomposites and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraftingNatural rubberMonomerCopolymerStyrenePolymer chemistryMaterials scienceMethyl methacrylateFactorial experimentFourier transform infrared spectroscopyPolymerizationStyrene-butadieneChemical engineeringComposite materialPolymerMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Graft copolymerization of styrene (St) and methyl methacrylate (MMA) in the presence of natural rubber latex using cumene hydroperoxide/tetraethylenepentamine redox initiator system was prepared at various process variables. The synthesized graft copolymers were purified and then characterized by Fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy analysis. A full 2 4 factorial experimental design was applied to study the effect of various process variables on grafting efficiency. The following four independent variables considered to be mainly affecting the grafting efficiency were reaction temperature, rubber‐to‐monomer ratio, St‐to‐MMA ratio, and initiator amount used in the secondary polymerization. It was shown in this study that the reaction temperature significantly influenced the grafting efficiency, increasing as the temperature was increased. The amount of grafting increased with increasing rubber‐to‐monomer ratio and St‐to‐MMA ratio, whereas the amount of grafting decreased with increasing amount of initiator. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 93: 455–463, 2004

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 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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Polymer ScienceSame topicPolymer Nanocomposites and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207