MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180855309 · doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.1c01922

Effect of Surface Silanol Density on the Proton Conductivity of Polymer-Surface-Functionalized Silica Nanoparticles

2021· article· en· W3180855309 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kazuki Koseki, Toshihiko Arita, Keisuke Tabata, Tomohiro Nohara, Ryota Sato, Shusaku Nagano, Akito Masuhara

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceDavid Suzuki Foundation
KeywordsSilanolPolymerChain transferRaftMaterials scienceChemical engineeringPolymer architecturePolymer chemistryConductivitySurface modificationNanoparticleAdsorptionReversible addition−fragmentation chain-transfer polymerizationPolymerizationRadical polymerizationChemistryNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryComposite materialCatalysisPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) material using polymer-coated silica nanoparticles (NPs) by the reversible addition-fragmentation chain-transfer polymerization with particles (RAFT PwP) method. In this paper, we controlled the number density of surface silanol groups on the silica NPs that not only maintain the structure of the surface adsorbed polymers by RAFT PwP but also form fast proton-conducting interface to study the silanol density effect on proton conductivity. The number of surface silanol groups was successfully increased by NaOH surface treatment and decreased by heat treatment. Then, we clarified that silanol-rich silica NPs with a polyacrylic acid and polystyrene block copolymer (PAA-b-PS) applied by RAFT PwP exhibit larger proton conductivity. This result implies that hydrophilicity of the filler is one of the important factors in the design of filler-functionalized PEM with high proton conductivity.

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 score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Sustainable Chemistry & EngineeringSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207