Comparative study of CNC and CNF as additives in waterborne acrylate-based anti-corrosion coatings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nanocomposite coatings are of great interest as barrier coatings since synergy effects between matrix and additive properties can be achieved. This, however, requires favorable additive-matrix interactions to provide a strong interphase (interface region). In this work we elucidate the properties of two environmentally benign nanocomposite coatings based on a waterborne acrylate formulation with additives from renewable sources, i.e. either cellulose nanocrystals, CNC; or, alternatively, cellulose nanofibrils, CNF. We focus on the corrosion protective properties of these coatings and discuss the reason why the nanocomposite with CNC displays favorable corrosion protection properties whereas that with CNF does not. To this end we utilized scanning electron microscopy, water contact angle measurement, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy techniques to investigate the microstructure, surface wetting, interactions between cellulosic materials and matrix as well as corrosion protective properties of both composite coatings.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it