Rheology of complex biobased quaternary blends: Poly(lactic acid) [poly(ethylene oxide)]/poly(ether-b-amide)/poly(amide 11)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linear and nonlinear viscoelastic approaches are used to study multiphase biobased blends of poly(lactic acid), poly(amide 11), poly(ether-b-amide) (PEBA), and poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) in a wide range of compositions. The novelty of this work resides in (a) the study of hybrid quaternary blends with droplet-matrix as well as cocontinuous morphology, (b) the effect of the PEO and PEBA blend components on the rheological properties, and (c) the investigation of the nonlinear viscoelastic regime for complex hybrid blends. Correlations are established between blend morphology and rheological behavior. Among the different linear rheological approaches, i.e., elastic modulus, complex viscosity, yield stress, Cole–Cole plots, Han plots, and Mavridish–Shroff or Booij–Palmen plots, the latter is the most sensitive allowing extraction of a relaxation time from the plot. The results correlate reasonably well with the different morphologies of the blends. Both, linear and nonlinear methods lead to compatible results, distinguishing among blends with droplet-matrix, partially continuous dispersed phase and fully cocontinuous morphologies. Moreover, for the first time, the analysis of the nonlinear parameter, Q0, allows a qualitative comparison of the interfacial areas of blends with a dispersed phase-matrix morphology at different continuity levels and those with cocontinuous morphology.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".