MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biocompound-Based Multiple Shape Memory Polymers Reinforced by Photo-Cross-Linking

2015· article· en· W2510714198 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaojin Wang, Yong‐Guang Jia, X. X. Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer composites and self-healing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesChina Scholarship CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMaterials scienceCopolymerShape-memory polymerMonomerMethacrylateShape-memory alloyPolymerizationPolymerEthylene glycolPolymer chemistryChemical engineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the design of shape memory polymers with potential biomedical applications, we synthesized methacrylate-based monomers bearing biological compounds such as cholic acid and cinnamic acid in addition to oligo(ethylene glycol) as pendant groups and opted to use a simple radical polymerization method for the preparation of the copolymers. The glass transition temperatures of these polymers are broad and tunable and can thus accommodate dual and triple shape memory behaviors. The fixity ratios of dual and triple shape memory are all above 91%. The recovery ratio of dual shape memory is 89.5%, whereas the two recovery ratios of triple shape memory are 53.2 and 81.5%, respectively. To further improve the shape memory properties, a cinnamic acid-based methacrylate monomer was incorporated into the copolymers to enable a photo-cross-linking of the terpolymer. After irradiation, the fixity ratios remain high, whereas the recovery ratios of dual and triple shape memories are much improved. The terpolymers after light irradiation even show quadruple shape memory property. Different irradiation times were tested to optimize the shape memory effects. The recovery ratio of dual shape memory of such terpolymers can reach as high as 98.6%, whereas the recovery ratios of triple and quadruple shape memories are improved to the range of 75.3-99.1%.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations52
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Biomaterials Science & EngineeringSame topicPolymer composites and self-healingFrench-language works237,207