Surfactant‐free emulsion copolymerization of styrene and methyl methacrylate for preparation of water‐redispersible polymeric powders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Poly(methyl methacrylate), polystyrene, and poly(styrene‐ co ‐methyl methacrylate) cationically stabilized latexes with up to 25% solid content were prepared by surfactant‐free emulsion polymerization (SFEP) employing 1 mol % 2,2′‐azobis[2‐(2‐imidazolin‐2‐yl)propane]dihydrochloride (VA‐044) as an initiator and stabilizer (inisurf) with respect to monomer at 70 °C. The latexes had 200–500 nm z ‐diameter and a very narrow size distribution (PDI < 0.05). The stabilizing amidinium moieties from VA‐044 were covalently bound to the particles. After drying in air, poly(styrene‐ co ‐methyl methacrylate), PS‐ co ‐PMMA latexes were easily redispersible in water simply by addition of water and a few minutes of gentle stirring. The redispersed latex particles had colloidal characteristics very similar to the original latex particles in terms of polydispersity, size, and zeta potential. In contrast, latexes prepared with a similar formulation but using a conventional cationic surfactant (CTAB) that was not covalently bound to the particles were not redispersible. This is the simplest method reported so far for the preparation of redispersible latexes that do not use high stabilizer concentrations. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2018 , 56 , 2376–2381
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".