Synthesis and characterization of polylactides with different branched architectures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Star‐shaped and comb‐like poly(L‐Lactide)s (PLA) are produced by employing multifunctional initiators, and hyperbranched structure is prepared using a cyclic co‐monomer with hydroxyl group. FTIR, size exclusion chromatography, and H‐NMR techniques are employed to characterize the synthesized polymers, validating the formation of desired structures with chain lengths above the critical length for entanglement. After characterization of the synthesized polymers, the effect of branching on PLA properties is investigated by comparing the crystallization and rheological behavior of branched PLAs to those of a linear commercial grade. Differential scanning calorimetry and optical microscopy observations reveal a remarkable improvement in PLA crystallization due to the nucleation role of branching points. Moreover, synthesized polylactides exhibit strain hardening behavior during elongational viscosity measurements by a sentmanat extension rheometer platform. Significant improvements in crystallization and elongational rheology behavior of the synthesized polymers support the achievement of branched polymer structures. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 2015, 53, 522–531
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 | 0.001 | 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".