MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515023934 · doi:10.1021/acs.oprd.5b00045

In Situ Monitoring of Emulsion Polymerization by Raman Spectroscopy: A Robust and Versatile Chemometric Analysis Method

2015· article· en· W2515023934 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoyun Chen, Ken Laughlin, Justin R. Sparks, Linus Linder, Vince Farozic, Hanqing Masser, Michael Petr

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic Process Research & Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsDow Chemical (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonomerEmulsion polymerizationRaman spectroscopyPolymerPolymerizationEmulsionCalibrationIn situMaterials scienceChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Organic chemistryOpticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emulsion polymerization remains a challenging system for in situ Raman spectroscopic analysis despite extensive research on the necessary instrumentation and chemometric data analysis methods. In this study, we demonstrate a new and facile data analysis method, making in situ Raman spectroscopy a more versatile research tool for monitoring the concentrations of monomers in reactions spanning a wide range of compositions. The method improvement stems from the use of the homopolymer as an internal standard for the corresponding monomer. Classical least-squares or indirect hard modeling is used for the spectral analysis to determine the spectral responses of major monomers and polymers within the system. Once the relative response factor ratios for a number of monomer-homopolymer pairs are determined in the calibration, they can be used to calculate the concentration ratio for such pairs based on reaction spectra. This approach offers two important advantages in determining the conversion of monomer to polymer. First, because the polymer internal standard will always be present for the corresponding monomer, it is straightforward to compensate for variable signal intensity due to changes in light scattering or instrumental fluctuations. Second, it is possible to calibrate based on a small set of monomer and homopolymer standards. The appropriate pairs can then be selected to establish a calibration method for any polymer product involving a combination of monomers from this set without the need for recalibration. To demonstrate this technique, we provide examples of in situ Raman monitoring for both batch and semibatch emulsion polymerizations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.331 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganic Process Research & DevelopmentSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207