MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312547238 · doi:10.1021/la404977t

Tuning Cellulose Nanocrystal Gelation with Polysaccharides and Surfactants

2014· article· en· W2312547238 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemical engineeringAdsorptionNanocrystalRheologyCelluloseChemistryPolysaccharidePolymerLocust bean gumMaterials sciencePolymer chemistryOrganic chemistryXanthan gumComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gelation of cellulose nanocrystal (CNC) dispersions was measured as a function of the presence of four nonionic polysaccharides. Addition of hydroxyethyl cellulose (HEC), hydroxypropyl guar (HPG), or locust bean gum (LBG) to CNC dispersions induced the gelation of dilute CNC dispersions, whereas dextran (DEX) did not. These behaviors correlated with adsorption tendencies; HEC, HPG, and LBG adsorbed onto CNC-coated quartz crystal microbalance sensors, whereas DEX did not adsorb. We propose that the adsorbing polysaccharides greatly increased the effective volume fraction of dilute CNC dispersions, driving more of the nanocrystals into anisotropic domains. SDS and Triton X-100 addition disrupted HEC-CNC gels whereas CTAB did not. Surface plasmon resonance measurements with CNC-coated sensors showed that SDS and Triton X-100 partially removed adsorbed HEC, whereas CTAB did not. These behaviors illustrate the complexities associated with including CNC dispersions in formulated products: low CNC contents can induce spectacular changes in rheology; however, surfactants and soluble polymers may promote gel formation or induce CNC coagulation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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