Reinforcement of maleated polyethylene/ground tire rubber thermoplastic elastomers using talc and wood flour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Maleated polyethylene (MAPE)/Ground tire rubber (GTR) thermoplastic elastomer with 50 vol % GTR was reinforced by incorporation of talc powder and wood flour. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) reveals that maleated polyethylene (MAPE) has good compatibility with wood flour, but the adhesion with talc particles is weak. Tensile moduli of MAPE/GTR increase more significantly after inclusion of talc particles compared to wood flour. Prediction of the tensile modulus of hybrid MAPE/GTR/particle composites is successfully performed using a combination of Kerner and Halpin‐Tsai models. Elastic moduli are shown to depend strongly on both aspect ratio and level of particle dispersion in the matrix. Measurement of compression sets shows that elastic recovery of the compounds decreases after addition of solid particles. Samples having better particles/matrix compatibility show higher elastic recovery. Thermogravimetric analysis shows that inclusion of wood flour decreases thermal stability of compounds. Density and hardness of MAPE/GTR are also shown to increase after inclusion of particulate reinforcements. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2014, 131, 40195.
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".