Macromolecular architecture and complex viscosity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
General rigid bead-rod theory [O. Hassager, “Kinetic theory and rheology of bead-rod models for macromolecular solutions. II. Linear unsteady flow properties,” J. Chem. Phys. 60(10), 4001–4008 (1974)] explains polymer viscoelasticity from macromolecular orientation. By means of general rigid bead-rod theory, we relate the complex viscosity of polymeric liquids to the architecture of axisymmetric macromolecules. In this work, we explore the zero-shear and complex viscosities of 24 different axisymmetric polymer configurations. When nondimensionalized with the zero-shear viscosity, the complex viscosity depends on the dimensionless frequency and the sole dimensionless architectural parameter, the macromolecular lopsidedness. In this work, in this way, we compare and contrast the elastic and viscous components of the complex viscosities of macromolecular chains that are straight, branched, ringed, or star-branched. We explore the effects of branch position along a straight chain, branched-chain backbone length, branched-chain branch-functionality, branch spacing along a straight chain (including pom-poms), the number of branches along a straight chain, ringed polymer perimeter, branch-functionality in planar stars, and branch dimensionality.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".