MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2483577492 · doi:10.1021/bk-2001-0790.ch001

Drying Modes of Polymer Colloids

2001· book-chapter· en· W2483577492 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACS symposium series · 2001
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterial Properties and Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRheologyMaterials scienceViscoelasticityPolymerComposite materialDispersion (optics)ColloidSubstrate (aquarium)CoatingParticle (ecology)MoistureHomogeneousChemical engineeringOpticsThermodynamicsEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter reviews the complex step of drying in the latex film formation process. Drying modes have a profound effect on drying rates and on the final properties of films, primarily through their influence on film morphology and the distribution of water-soluble species. Three distinct drying modes (acting separately, successively or together) can be defined, namely homogeneous drying (in which the water concentration remains uniform in the sample throughout the drying process), drying normal to the surface (where a dry layer of increasing thickness develops from the air surface of the latex coating; and lateral drying (where dry areas increase in size in a direction parallel to the substrate). Details are given on the current knowledge and understanding of these drying modes. The last section of the chapter considers the main parameters controlling the drying modes, i.e. thickness and geometric effects, the structure and rheology of the dispersion, particle viscoelasticity, and the overall rate of water loss.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.171 · 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