Using Pyrene Excimer Fluorescence To Probe Polymer Diffusion in Latex Films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study introduces a simple technique that can be used to quantitatively probe interparticle polymer diffusion (IPD) between adjacent particles in a latex film using pyrene excimer fluorescence (PEF). To demonstrate the validity of the technique, four latexes were prepared: two pyrene-labeled poly( n -butyl methacrylate) (Py-PBMA) latexes and two nonfluorescent PBMA latexes. The two pairs of Py-PBMA and PBMA latexes had similar distributions of polymer molecular weight and particle diameters. Mixtures of latex dispersions having a composition of 5 wt % Py-PBMA latex and 95 wt % nonfluorescent PBMA latex were cast into films. Fluorescence spectra of the films were acquired, and the ratio of the fluorescence intensities for the pyrene monomer ( I M ) and excimer ( I E ) was calculated to determine the I E / I M ratio. The latex films were then annealed at a constant temperature set between 75 and 119 °C. The fraction of mixing ( f m ), representing the amount of polymer having diffused out of a particle, was determined by monitoring the change in the I E / I M ratio as a function of annealing time. The f m profiles were then analyzed to yield the polymer diffusion coefficients, and the apparent activation energy ( E a ) for diffusion was found to equal 179 ± 7 and 170 ± 12 kJ mol –1 for the high and low molecular weight chains, respectively. The c 1 and c 2 parameters in the WLF equation were calculated to be 11 ± 2 and 170 ± 30 K, respectively. The E a values and c 1 and c 2 parameters were in close agreement with values previously found for PBMA by other techniques, suggesting that the PEF experiments provide a valid experimental means to probe IPD in latex films. The superiority of PEF over earlier procedures includes the extreme simplicity of the experimental method that involves the labeling of a single latex particle and the use of ratios of fluorescence intensity. It opens new research venues in the study of IPD during latex film formation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".