Biobased blends of poly(propylene carbonate) and poly(hydroxybutyrate‐co‐hydroxyvalerate): Fabrication and characterization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Poly(propylene carbonate) (PPC), a CO2‐based bioplastic and poly(hydroxybutyrate‐co‐hydroxyvalerate) (PHBV) were melt blended followed by injection molding. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy detected an interaction between the macromolecules from the reduction in the OH peak and a shift in the CO peak. The onset degradation temperature of the polymer blends was improved by 5% and 19% in comparison to PHBV and PPC, respectively. Blending PPC with PHBV reduced the melting and crystallization temperatures and crystallinity of the latter as observed through differential scanning calorimetry. The amorphous nature of PPC affected the thermal properties of PHBV by hindering the spherulitic growth and diluting the crystalline region. Scanning electron micrographs presented a uniform dispersion and morphology of the blends, which lead to balanced mechanical properties. Incorporating PHBV, a stiff semi‐crystalline polymer improved the dimensional stability of PPC by restricting the motion of its polymer chains. © 2016 The Authors Journal of Applied Polymer Science Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2017, 134, 44420.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".