Determination of reactivity ratios for the copolymerization of poly(acrylic acid‐<i>co</i>‐itaconic acid)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Monomer reactivity ratios are important parameters used in copolymerization kinetics to predict the rate of polymerization, copolymer composition and monomer sequence length, and by extension, molecular weight and distribution of the final product. Batch aqueous solution copolymerizations of acrylic acid (AA) and itaconic acid (IA) are performed at various feed compositions. Polymerizations are categorized into low (<11 wt %) conversion and higher (< 30 wt %) conversion data sets for analysis. Due to the limited solubility of IA in the reaction mixture, the feed composition of IA in all polymerizations is constrained to lower than 25 mol %. Conversion is determined by gravimetric methods, and copolymer composition via 1H‐NMR spectroscopy. All data are analyzed using the error‐in‐variables model (EVM) method. Two analyses are used, one with the EVM approach and another with a novel Direct Numerical Integration (DNI) coupled with the EVM method. The DNI/EVM approach yields values of rAA = 0.36 and rIA = 1.62 for the reactivity ratios. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016, 133, 44014.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".