MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164734270 · doi:10.1002/masy.200950710

Emulsification for Latex Production Using Static Mixers

2009· article· en· W2164734270 on OpenAlex
Ula El‐Jaby, Ghomali Farzi, Élodie Bourgeat‐Lami, Michael F. Cunningham, Timothy F. L. McKenna

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Symposia · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSurfactants and Colloidal Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiniemulsionStatic mixerPulmonary surfactantMonomerVolumetric flow rateMixing (physics)PolymerizationMaterials scienceChemical engineeringChemistryChromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Composite materialPolymerThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Summary: Evolution of droplets generated by static mixers have been investigated in terms of surfactant concentration, flow rate through the pump, monomer hydrophobicity and the type of static mixer. Operating at faster pump flow rates and using the PAC static mixers generated smaller miniemulsion droplets. Similar effects were observed at higher surfactant concentrations (3.0 vs. 1.0 g/L) and using monomers of increasing hydrophilicity (MMA vs. St). When comparing the efficiency of PAC static mixers to SMX mixing elements it was found that SMX was capable of generating droplets approximately 100 nm smaller at similar pump flow rates in the same time period. Based on these promising results, the SMX mixers were further evaluated based on surfactant concentration. The miniemulsion droplets were polymerized and their distribution was evaluated.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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