Synthesis and Assembly of Butyl Rubber–Poly(ethylene oxide) Graft Copolymers: From Surface Patterning to Resistance to Protein Adsorption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The patterning of copolymers on surfaces is of interest both for a fundamental understanding of polymer assembly processes and for applications ranging from microelectronics to biomaterials. Graft copolymers can provide new opportunities to control polymer composition and architecture, thus opening possibilities for new assembly processes and patterns. In this work, the reaction of a butyl rubber derivative functionalized with activated carbonates along the polymer backbone was reacted with amine terminated poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO–NH 2 ) to provide butyl rubber–PEO graft copolymers. The high efficiency of this reaction allowed for control of the PEO content by the number of equivalents of PEO–NH 2 used and its molecular weight, providing a small library of graft copolymers. This approach also provided butyl rubber–PEO graft copolymers with unprecedentedly high PEO content. Thin films of the polymers, prepared by spin-casting were studied by a number of techniques including atomic force microscopy, polarized optical microscopy, profilometry, and confocal fluorescence microscopy following the adsorption of a fluorescent protein. Interestingly, as the PEO content of the copolymers increased, an evolution from complex micrometer scale to nanometer scale patterns was observed. This was accompanied by resistance of the surfaces to protein adsorption at high PEO content, demonstrating that function can evolve from the complex interplay of thermodynamic and kinetic factors governing the assembly of these thin films.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".