MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336832657 · doi:10.1021/acs.cgd.5b01241

Phase Diagram of Glycerol Monostearate and Sodium Stearoyl Lactylate

2015· article· en· W2336832657 on OpenAlexaff
Fan C. Wang, Fernanda Peyronel, Alejandro G. Marangoni

Bibliographic record

VenueCrystal Growth & Design · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSurfactants and Colloidal Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersArgonne National LaboratoryOffice of Science
KeywordsDifferential scanning calorimetrySmall-angle X-ray scatteringAqueous solutionPhase (matter)ChemistryPhase diagramSodiumMaterials scienceCrystallographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChromatographyScatteringOrganic chemistryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The phase behavior of two solid emulsifiers glycerol monostearate (GMS) and sodium stearoyl lactylate (SSL) was examined using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), small and wide-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS and WAXS), and ultra small angle X-ray scattering (USAXS). The phase behavior of GMS–SSL in water (gelled aqueous dispersions) was also examined. For the nonaqueous systems, GMS and SSL were immiscible in the range of 20–80% and exhibited phase separation. On the other hand, systems with higher than 80% GMS or higher than 80% SSL were miscible and remained mixed after 4 weeks. Increasing the amount of SSL in GMS–SSL mixtures caused a reduction in the transition temperature of the sub-α phase and the melting temperature of GMS. Furthermore, adding up to 20% SSL to GMS slowed down the polymorphic transition of GMS from the α phase to the ß phase. Examination of the stability and polymorphic behavior of gelled aqueous dispersions of GMS–SSL mixtures revealed similar structural and thermal properties to their corresponding neat systems.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrystal Growth & DesignSame topicSurfactants and Colloidal SystemsFrench-language works237,207