Thermoforming starch‐<i>graft</i>‐polycaprolactone biocomposites via one‐pot microwave assisted ring opening polymerization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A thermoformable starch‐graft‐polycaprolactone biocomposite was prepared by initiating ring‐open polymerization of caprolactone monomer onto starch under microwave irradiation. In this case, the thermoplastic and hydrophobic modification of starch could be realized by one‐pot grafting PCL, where the grafted PCL chains acted as the “plasticizing” tails of thermoforming and as the hydrophobic species of water‐resistance. The resultant biocomposites were injection‐molded as the sheets and their structure and properties were investigated by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X‐ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, differential scanning calorimetry, dynamic mechanical analysis, contact angle measurement, and tensile testing. In this case, the grafted PCL chains entangled each other, and hence contributed to the strength and elongation of biocomposites. This work provided a simple strategy of one‐pot thermoplastic and hydrophobic modification of starch, and may be applied in a continuous process of modification, compounding, and molding. Meanwhile, the resultant biocomposites containing starch are believed to have a great potential application as an environment‐friendly and/or biomedical material. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2009
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".