Conformation study of poly(<i>p</i>‐dioxanone) fibers by polarized Raman spectroscopy, X‐ray diffraction, and conformation analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The molecular orientation distribution of poly(p‐dioxanone) (PPDX) uniaxially oriented commercial fibers was determined by polarized Raman spectroscopy and X‐ray diffraction. The order parameters 〈P200〉 and 〈P400〉 of the orientation distribution function were determined by polarized Raman spectroscopy. For the CO stretching band, the values of 〈P200〉 and 〈P400〉 obtained are equal to −0.40 ± 0.04 and 0.28 ± 0.04, respectively. These results clearly indicate that the carbonyl groups are highly oriented perpendicular to the fiber axis. X‐ray diffraction led to a fiber repeat value of 0.628 nm for these samples, and to 〈P200〉 and 〈P400〉 values of 0.93 and 0.82, respectively, for the c‐axis orientation, indicating a high orientation in the draw direction of the fibers. A Monte‐Carlo conformational search led to 20 low‐energy conformations, but only one of these was found compatible with both the fiber repeat and the angle between the CO bond and the fiber axis. This conformation, a 21 helix with a tg−ttg− succession of torsion angles, is proposed as the existing conformation in the crystalline state. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 46: 406–417, 2008
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".