MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160901235 · doi:10.1002/polb.23560

Quiescent crystallization of polypropylene: Experiments and modeling

2014· article· en· W2160901235 on OpenAlexaff
Maziar Derakhshandeh, Golnar Mozaffari, Antonios K. Doufas, Savvas G. Hatzikiriakos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer crystallization and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrystallizationDifferential scanning calorimetryNucleationPolypropyleneCrystallization of polymersIsothermal processMaterials scienceRheometryThermodynamicsOptical microscopeAvrami equationPolarized light microscopyPolymer chemistryPolymerComposite materialScanning electron microscopeOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quiescent crystallization of several polypropylenes (PPs) was examined using Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC) and Polarized Optical Microscopy (POM). The half-times of crystallization were obtained from the DSC thermographs employing the Avrami/Nakamura equation to fit and predict crystallization kinetics under isothermal and nonisothermal conditions. The induction times under nonisothermal conditions were estimated from isothermal crystallization data and used in conjunction with the Nakamura model in order to capture the crystallization behavior of the studied PPs. The Avrami/Nakamura model is found to fit and predict the nonisothermal crystallization data of the various PPs well over a range of cooling rates supporting its use in the simulation of polymer processes of industrial relevance. POM was used in line with parallel plate rheometry (Anton Paar, MCR 502) under no flow conditions to study the shape and growth rate of crystals of various PP resins at different temperatures or cooling rates. The growth rate of crystals is impeded exponentially with increase of temperature. The various PP resins of different molecular architecture have shown different nucleation and growth rate characteristics behavior under similar processing conditions. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 2014, 52, 1259–1275

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Polymer Science Part B Polymer PhysicsSame topicPolymer crystallization and propertiesFrench-language works237,207