MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132909073 · doi:10.1002/polb.20441

Crystallization analysis fractionation

2005· article· en· W2132909073 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer crystallization and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyolefinFractionationCrystallinityPolymer scienceCrystallizationCharacterization (materials science)PolymerMaterials sciencePolymerizationPolymer chemistryChemical engineeringChemistryNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Crystallization analysis fractionation (CRYSTAF) is an analytical technique for determining the distribution of chain crystallizabilities of semicrystalline polymers. After only approximately a decade since it was developed, CRYSTAF has become one of the most important characterization techniques in polyolefin characterization laboratories because it provides fast and crucial information required for the proper understanding of polymerization mechanisms and structure–property relationships. In the polyolefin industry, it has been established as an indispensable tool for product development and product quality monitoring. This highlight article covers basic operation procedures, applications, and theoretical aspects of polymer fractionation with CRYSTAF. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 43: 1557–1570, 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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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