MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794392385 · doi:10.1002/masy.201700061

Mathematical Modeling of Multiple High Temperature Thermal Gradient Interaction Chromatography (m‐HT‐TGIC) for Ethylene/1‐Olefin Copolymer Blends

2018· article· en· W2794392385 on OpenAlexaff
Siwakorn Prasongsuksakul, Siripon Anantawaraskul, João B. P. Soares

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Symposia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersKasetsart UniversityThailand Research Fund
KeywordsCopolymerAdsorptionDesorptionChromatographyEthyleneCrystallizationFractionationMaterials scienceElutionThermal desorptionChemical engineeringPopulationChemistryOrganic chemistryComposite materialPolymerCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High temperature thermal gradient interaction chromatography (HT‐TGIC) have been developed to measure the chemical composition distribution (CCD) of ethylene/1‐olefin copolymers over a wide range of compositions. Multiple high temperature thermal gradient interaction chromatography (m‐HT‐TGIC) is a concept developed to further enhance the physical separation of copolymer components by performing multiple adsorption/desorption cycles, similarly to the operation of multiple crystallization elution fractionation (m‐CEF) developed earlier. In this work, a mathematical model for describing m‐HT‐TGIC is developed based on population balances in multiple non‐equilibrium adsorption/desorption stages for ethylene/1‐olefin copolymer blends. The effects of number of m‐HT‐TGIC cycles, section length, and column length are also reported and discussed.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromolecular SymposiaSame topicAnalytical Chemistry and ChromatographyFrench-language works237,207