Graphene Oxide Reinforced Bio-Epoxy Polymers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of epoxy/graphene oxide (GO) composite studies have been conducted on synthetic epoxies.This work presents the results on GO filler loadings of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 wt.% to a green bio-epoxy polymer.GO was synthesized from oxidation of graphite flakes.The epoxy/GO composites were prepared using a solution mixing route.Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to examine the graphite and GO powder morphology and composite fractured surfaces.Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy was used to identify functional groups on the produced GO material.Tensile strength of pure and modified bio-epoxy composites was evaluated.SEM showed differences in fractured surfaces which implies the GO material was able to modify the bio-epoxy polymer.The FTIR results confirmed oxidation of the graphite was successful.The tensile strength and modulus improved by 23 % and 35 %, respectively as compared to the pure bio-epoxy with only 0.3 wt.% GO filler.Additions of GO to bio-epoxy revealed a significant enhancement in tensile strength and stiffness could be achieved with considerable lower filler loadings than traditional fillers.
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) | 0.001 | 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".