MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2255227838 · doi:10.1149/ma2015-02/37/1390

Ionomer Self-Assembly in Dilute Solution: A Molecular Dynamics Study

2015· article· en· W2255227838 on OpenAlexaff
Mahdi Ghelichi, Kourosh Malek, Michael Eikerling

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonomerNafionChemical physicsMembranePolymerChemistryHydrophobic effectChemical engineeringCounterionElectrolyteIonic bondingPolymer chemistryMolecular dynamicsMaterials scienceComposite materialComputational chemistryOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistryIonCopolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-assembly of ionomer chains in dilute solution is studied by classical molecular dynamics. Based on a bead-spring ionomer model, the simulation approach captures formation of cylindrical, bundle-like [1] aggregates with a hydrophobic core region, a surface layer of charged anionic headgroups and a halo of counterions (protons) in the surrounding aqueous phase. Ionomer aggregation enforces the stretching and stiffening of ionomer chains, which is caused mainly by the repulsion of anionic headgroups. The strengths of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions are varied to explore their effect on the aggregation process. Strong hydrophobicity of the ionomer main chain results in greater aggregate sizes. Figure 1a shows the result of the changes in the aggregate size, , over the range of explored hydrophobicity. Strong electrostatic interaction of ionic headgroups decreases the aggregate size, results are shown in figure 1b. Simulations also show the spontaneous formation of networks of ionomer bundles. Results of simulations will be discussed in the context of experimental studies on the formation of rodlike structures in ionomer solutions [2-3] that form the mechanically stable skeleton of polymer electrolyte membranes such as Nafion [4]. Moreover, implications of simulation results for water sorption phenomena [5], proton conductivity [6], membrane degradation [7] and membrane failure will be discussed. Figure caption: Figure 1. Changes of the average aggregate size, , as a function of variation in strengths of hydrophobic interactions (a) and electrostatic interactions (b). Strength of hydrophobic interactions are controlled through variation of strength of excluded volume interaction of hydrophobic monomeric beads while the electrostatic strength is varied through changes in the Bjerrum length. References: P.-É. Alix Melchy, M. H. Eikerling, Phys. Rev. E, 89, 032603, (2014). B. Loppinet, G. Gebel, C. E. Williams, J. Phys. Chem. B, 101, 1884-1892, (1997) S. Jiang, K. - Q. Xia, G. Xu, Macromolecules, 34, 7783-7788, (2001). L. Rubatat, A. L. Rollet, G. Gebel, O. Diat, Macromolecules, 35, 4050-4055, (2002). M. Eikerling, P. Berg, Soft Matter, 7, 5976–5990, (2011). K. - D. Kreuer, Chem. Mater., 8, 610–641, (1996). M. Ghelichi, P.-É. Alix Melchy, M. H. Eikerling, J. Phys. Chem. B, 118, 11375−11386, (2014) Figure 1

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting Abstracts→Same topicFuel Cells and Related Materials→French-language works237,207→