Compatibilization efficiency in post‐consumer recycled polyethylene/polypropylene blends: Effect of contamination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work investigates the effect of ethylene–octene copolymer (EOC) as a compatibilizer for two virgin and two recycled polyethylene/polypropylene blends. In particular, a focus is made on the interfering effects of contamination in recycled materials. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) shows that (i) recycled compounds have smaller domain sizes than virgin compounds, and (ii) addition of a compatibilizer is much more effective on domain sizes reduction in virgin compounds than in recycled ones. Conversely, transmission electron microscopy, coupled with energy dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy, shows the presence of nano‐size contaminants in both recycled blends. Such contaminants are considered responsible for the above mentioned observations in SEM. Mechanical characterizations are also in good agreement with morphological observations. Although recycled compounds containing EOC show improved deformability, the ultimate deformation of virgin compounds is much higher. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 55:2368–2376, 2015. © 2015 Society of Plastics Engineers
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".