Tuning amphiphilicity/temperature‐induced self‐assembly and in‐situ disulfide crosslinking of reduction‐responsive block copolymers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT New poly(ethylene oxide)‐based block copolymers (ssBCs) with a random copolymer block consisting of a reduction‐responsive disulfide‐labeled methacrylate (HMssEt) and a thermoresponsive di(ethylene glycol)‐containing methacrylate (MEO2MA) units were synthesized. The ratio of HMssEt/MEO2MA units in the random P(MEO2MA‐co‐HMssEt) copolymer block enables the characteristics of well‐defined ssBCs to be amphiphilic or thermoresponsive and double hydrophilic. Their amphiphilicity or temperature‐induced self‐assembly results in nanoaggregates with hydrophobic cores having different densities of pendant disulfide linkages. The effect of disulfide crosslinking density on morphological variation of disulfide‐crosslinked nanogels is investigated. In response to reductive reactions, the partial cleavage of pendant disulfide linkages in the hydrophobic cores converts the physically associated aggregates to disulfide‐crosslinked nanogels. The occurrence of in‐situ disulfide crosslinks provides colloidal stability upon dilution. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2014, 52, 2057–2067
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".