MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104682247 · doi:10.1021/acsomega.0c04010

Physicochemical Characterization of Polyvinyl Pyrrolidone: A Tale of Two Polyvinyl Pyrrolidones

2020· article· en· W3104682247 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Karina Mireles, Menq‐Rong Wu, Nada Saadeh, E. Sacher

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Omega · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFourier transform infrared spectroscopyDilutionChemical engineeringMaterials scienceAqueous solutionDispersion (optics)Polyvinyl acetateCharacterization (materials science)HydrolysisNuclear chemistryChemistryPolymerNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Of several samples of polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP) used to coat and stabilize freshly manufactured aqueous dispersions of silver nanoparticles, one batch gave anomalous results: the dispersion maintained continued stability, even on extensive dilution. Our efforts to understand this desirable feature concluded that the generally used spectral method of PVP purity verification, Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, was incapable of answering our inquiry. This led to the employment of several other methods, including X-ray photoelectron and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopies, which ultimately revealed several possible reasons for the dilution stability, including incomplete PVP hydrolysis during manufacture and the presence of hydroperoxide contaminants. It led, as well, to explanations for the shortcomings of FTIR spectroscopy as a verification method for PVP purity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations114
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS OmegaSame topicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207