Sorption and diffusion of carbon dioxide in wood‐fiber/polystyrene composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, sorption and diffusion of carbon dioxide (CO2) in wood‐fiber/polystyrene composites were investigated. The effects of gas pressure and fiber content on the solubility and diffusion coefficients were evaluated. A statistical analysis indicated that pressure is more important than fiber content in determining the solubility and diffusivity of CO2. An increase in saturation pressure causes an increase in the solubility and diffusion coefficients, whereas inclusion of the fibers decreases both of these properties. Models were developed to predict the uptake and diffusion coefficients of CO2 in the composite samples as functions of pressure and fiber content. A theoretical model based on Henry's law and the Langmuir equation compared favorably to the experimental data for CO2 solubility. This dual mode model also described both the transient sorption and desorption data, but only if the concentration‐dependent value of diffusivity was treated as a history‐dependent parameter. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 40: 723–735, 2002
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".