Hybrid poly(lactic acid)/nanocellulose/nanoclay composites with synergistically enhanced barrier properties and improved thermomechanical resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Poly(lactic acid) ( PLA )‐based hybrid nanocomposites ( PLA , nanoclay and nanocellulose) were prepared by reinforcing neat PLA with commercially available nanoclay (Cloisite C30B ) and nanocellulose, in the form of either partially acetylated cellulose nanofibres ( CNFs ) or nanocrystalline cellulose. Composites with 1 or 5 wt% of nanocellulose, in combination with 1, 3 and 5 wt% of nanoclay, were prepared, and their barrier properties were investigated. It was found that the combination of clay and nanocellulose clearly resulted in synergistic behaviour in terms of the oxygen transmission rate ( OTR ) through a reduction of up to 90% in OTR and a further reduction in the water vapour transmission rate of up to 76%. In addition, the nanocomposite films showed improved thermomechanical resistance and improved crystallisation kinetics while maintaining high film transparency. This makes the hybrid PLA / CNF / C30B nanocomposites a very promising material for food packaging applications. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry
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) | 0.001 | 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".