MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333081368 · doi:10.1021/ma302663u

Ternary Graft Copolymers and Their Use in Nanocapsule Preparation

2013· article· en· W2333081368 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Liu, Jiwen Hu, Guojun Liu, Chengmin Hou, Shudong Lin, Hailiang Zou, Ganwei Zhang, Jianping Sun, Hongsheng Luo, Yuanyuan Tu

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersChinese Academy of SciencesNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCopolymerPolymer chemistryMethacrylatePolymerPolystyreneEthylene glycolMaterials scienceMethyl methacrylateChemistryOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grafting three types of polymer chains onto the backbone of a fourth polymer yielded a ternary graft copolymer. The copolymer dispersed oil droplets in water with one type of graft stretching into the oil phase, the second type forming a thin membrane separating the two phases, and the third type stretching into the water phase. Since the second type was also photo-cross-linkable, shining UV light on the system produced permanent nanocapsules. To produce the graft copolymer, the backbone polymer used was poly(3-azido-2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate), P(GMA-N 3 ). The grafts used were all end-functionalized by alkyne groups, and the polymers were poly(ethylene glycol) methyl ether (MPEG), polystyrene (PS), and poly(2-cinnamoyloxyethyl methacrylate) (PCEMA), respectively. Evidently, MPEG was water-soluble, PS was soluble in the used oil decahydronaphthalene (DN), and PCEMA was photo-cross-linkable and soluble in neither water nor DN. The grafts denoted as MPEG–C≡CH, PS–C≡CH, and PCEMA–C≡CH were coupled to P(GMA-N 3 ) via click chemistry between the azide and alkyne units. Under the used conditions, the one-pot grafting reactions were quantitative.

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 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207