Cationic and anionic cellulose nanocrystalline (CNC) hydrogels: A rheological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the rheology of cellulose nanocrystalline (CNC) suspensions has been widely studied, less attention has been paid to the modified cellulose nanocrystals such as cationic and anionic cellulose hydrogels. In this work, the rheological behavior of cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs), anionic CNCs (pCNCs), and cationic CNCs (nCNCs), was comparatively studied. The rheological behavior demonstrated that the nCNC and pCNC form hydrogen bonding, which significantly contributes to the increase in the gel strengths in the sonicated state. The formation of such structures between individual fibers prevents flocculation due to the increased suspension stability. In addition, the extensive formation of hydrogen bonding in the case of nCNC compared to that of pCNC explains its enhanced rheological properties. The effect of pre-shear has been studied in detail for these systems by considering a combination of pre-shear and startup of steady shear in different shearing directions with certain rest/recovery time in between to eliminate strain history and thus eliminate the possible bias of pre-shearing on structure formation.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".