MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010664525 · doi:10.1063/5.0004513

Van Gurp–Palmen relations for long-chain branching from general rigid bead-rod theory

2020· article· en· W3010664525 on OpenAlexafffund
M. A. Kanso, A. Jeffrey Giacomin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicRheology and Fluid Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsBranching (polymer chemistry)RheologyDispersityPhysicsShear flowViscoelasticityThermodynamicsChain (unit)PolymerMechanicsPolymer chemistryMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirically, we find that parametric plots of mechanical loss angle vs complex shear modulus may depend neither on temperature [M. van Gurp and J. Palmen, “Time-temperature superposition for polymeric blends,” Rheol. Bull. 67, 5–8 (1998)] nor on average molecular weight [S. Hatzikiriakos, “Long chain branching and polydispersity effects on the rheological properties of polyethylenes,” Polym. Eng. Sci. 40, 2279 (2000)]. Moreover, Hatzikiriakos (2000) discovered that, for fixed polydispersity, these van Gurp–Palmen curves descend with long-chain branching content. In this paper, we find that 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)] can explain these descents. We explore the effects of branching along a straight chain in small-amplitude oscillatory shear flow. Specifically, we explore the number of branches, branch length, branch position, and branch distribution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicRheology and Fluid Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207