2,2‐Bis[4‐(3,4‐dicarboxyphenoxy) phenyl]propane dianhydride (BPADA)‐based polyimide membranes for pervaporation dehydration of isopropanol: Characterization and comparison with 4,4′‐(hexafluoroisopropylidene) diphthalic anhydride (6FDA)‐based polyimide membranes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Polyimides were synthesized from one‐step polycondensation of BPADA and various diamines and were characterized with GPC, FTIR, NMR, DSC, and TGA. Polyimide membranes were prepared, and their hydrophilicity was estimated by contact angles and the free energies of interfacial interactions. Pervaporation properties were investigated for the dehydration of isopropanol, and comparisons were made between BPADA‐based membranes and 6FDA‐based membranes. The concentration coefficients of BPADA‐based membranes were calculated from the linear moiety contribution method based on the results from 6FDA‐based membranes, and they were compared to understand the effects of the feed concentration on pervaporation properties. The effects of temperature on permeation flux were studied with permeation activation energies for total flux and water flux in permeates. Moiety contribution factors for activation energies were used to correlate permeation flux and monomer moieties in the polymers, and reasonable results were obtained for BPADA. It is revealed that steric effects of monomers may change the diffusion properties, while functional groups are favorable to the changes in sorption properties. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".