Compatibilized polypropylene nanocomposites containing expanded graphite and graphene nanoplatelets
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
Abstract We present a non‐covalent compatibilization approach to prepare polypropylene (PP) composites containing expanded graphite (EG) and graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) by melt compounding. This method involves PP matrix functionalization with pyridine (Py) moieties, which are capable of engaging in π‐π interactions with the surface of the EG and GNPs. The addition of 10 wt% of PP grafted with amino‐pyridine (PP‐g‐Py) to neat PP facilitated the break‐up of EG particles, by intercalating between their layers and facilitating their separation into smaller tactoids. GNPs were prepared starting from EG through a thermomechanical exfoliation method. Addition of GNPs to PP resulted in well‐dispersed platelets having aspect ratios as high as 40, whereas in the presence of the PP‐g‐Py compatibilizer the matrix contained sub‐micron scale platelets. The electrical percolation thresholds were in the vicinity of 6 and 10 vol% in the compatibilized PP‐EG and PP‐GNP composites, respectively, and the maximum value of the electrical conductivity achieved was 10 −1 S/m for the compatibilized GNP composites. Addition of GNPs resulted in increases in the flexural moduli by as much as 95% compared to the unfilled PP, whereas the impact strength remained unaffected up to 10 wt% GNP content.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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