Making Nanocomposites of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Polymers Using Gas‐Responsive Cellulose Nanocrystals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Generally, different surface‐functionalized cellulose nanocrystals (CNC) are required for use as nanofillers in hydrophilic and hydrophobic polymers. In the present study, for the first time, a kind of “universal” nanofiller for polymer composites is demonstrated by using CNC grafted with a gas‐responsive polymer. CNC are functionalized with pyrene‐containing poly(2‐(N,N‐diethylaminoethyl)methacrylate) (CNC‐g‐PDEAEMA‐Py). The reversible transport of the nanocrystals between phase‐separated water and toluene is proved by nuclear magnetic resonance (1H NMR) and fluorescence spectroscopy. On the one hand, water‐soluble poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) can be mixed with dispersed CNC upon CO2 bubbling for making the PVA‐CNC nanocomposite. On the other hand, after the transfer of CNC into the toluene solution upon N2 bubbling, styrene‐butadiene‐styrene (SBS) triblock copolymer can be dissolved for the SBS‐CNC nanocomposite. In both systems, CNC are well dispersed, having an effect on the mechanical and shape memory properties of SBS and PVA, respectively.
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) | 0.001 | 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".