Effect of natural flours on crystallization behaviors of poly(3‐hydroxybutyrate‐<i>co</i>‐3‐hydroxyhexanoate)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper investigates the effects of natural flours on the crystallization behavior of poly(3‐hydroxybutyrate‐co‐3‐hydroxyhexanoate) (PHBH). Two types of PHBH (3‐hydroxyhexanoate [3HH] contents of 5.6 and 11.1 mol %) were used as polymer matrix. One of two natural flours (cellulose or wood) at 1 wt % was added to this PHBH matrix. Crystallization behaviors under nonisothermal conditions were characterized using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), while those under isothermal conditions were characterized using DSC and polarized optical microscopy. The results suggested that both cellulose and wood flour addition enhanced crystallization of the PHBH containing 5.6 mol % of 3HH (i.e., increased crystallization peak temperature and degree of crystallinity under the nonisothermal conditions, as well as decreased crystallization half time under the isothermal conditions). Of the two flours, wood flour was found to have greater effects, due to its higher crystal nucleating ability. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016, 133, 43600.
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".