MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Morphological, Thermal and Electrical Properties of (PEO/PVP)/ Au Nanocomposite Before and After Gamma-Irradiation

2017· article· en· W2626809860 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E.M. Abdelrazek, A. M. Abdelghany, S.I. Badr, M.A. Morsi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Nanocomposite Synthesis and Irradiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceDifferential scanning calorimetryNanocompositeScanning electron microscopeElectrical resistivity and conductivityThermal stabilityIrradiationCastingComposite materialPolymerNanoparticleChemical engineeringNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gold nanoparticles (Au NPs) have been successfully biosynthesized by Chenopodium murale (C. murale) leaf extract. Au NPs were incorporated within polyethylene oxide (PEO)/polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP) polymer blend by casting method. Scanning electron microscope (SEM), Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and DC electrical resistivity were used to investigate the morphological, thermal, and electrical properties of blend/Au nanocomposite before and after gamma-irradiation at different doses (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 MR).SEM micrographs confirmed the dispersion of Au NPs within the polymeric matrix due to effect of irradiation process. DSC analysis showed that the thermal stability for irradiated samples was improved as compared with pure blend and its nanocomposite. DC measurements revealed nonlinear behavior for electrical resistivity versus temperature. The electrical resistivity values for blend/Au nanocopmosite and its high irradiated samples were less compared to pure blend.

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 score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer ScienceSame topicPolymer Nanocomposite Synthesis and IrradiationFrench-language works237,207