MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084979054 · doi:10.3389/fchem.2020.00655

Cellulose Nanocomposite Hydrogels: From Formulation to Material Properties

2020· article· en· W3084979054 on OpenAlexaff
Svetlana Butylina, Shiyu Geng, Katri Laatikainen, Kristiina Oksman

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Chemistry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEtelä-Karjalan RahastoKempestiftelsernaKempe Foundation
KeywordsSelf-healing hydrogelsVinyl alcoholCrystallinityMaterials scienceChemical engineeringComposite numberAbsorption of waterCelluloseNanocompositeUltimate tensile strengthPolymerComposite materialPolymer chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) hydrogels produced using the freeze-thaw method have attracted attention for a long time since their first preparation in 1975. Due to the importance of polymer intrinsic features and the advantages associated with them, they are very suitable for biomedical applications such as tissue engineering and drug delivery systems. On the other hand, there is an increasing interest in the use of biobased additives such as cellulose nanocrystals, CNC. This study focused on composite hydrogels which were produced by using different concentrations of PVA (5 and 10%) and CNC (1 and 10 wt.%), also, pure PVA hydrogels were used as references. The main goal was to determine the impact of both components on mechanical, thermal, and water absorption properties of composite hydrogels as well as on morphology and initial water content. It was found that PVA had a dominating effect on all hydrogels. The effect of the CNC addition was both concentration-dependent and case-dependent. As a general trend, addition of CNC decreased the water content of the prepared hydrogels, decreased the crystallinity of the PVA, and increased the hydrogels compression modulus and strength to some extent. The performance of composite hydrogels in a cyclic compression test was studied; the hydrogel with low PVA (5) and high CNC (10) content showed totally reversible behavior after 10 cycles.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in ChemistrySame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207