Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the general rigid bead-rod theory, we explain the elasticity of a polymeric liquid by considering just the orientation of a suspension of macromolecules. With the general rigid bead-rod theory, we construct macromolecules from sets of beads whose positions, relative to one another, are fixed. The general rigid bead-rod theory is, thus, not to be confused with a freely jointed chain, where the beads are rigidly separated but the joints rotate freely. Our macromolecular bead-rod models are suspended in a Newtonian solvent. In this work, we neglect interactions of the solvent velocity fields, be they between the nearest beads (Stewart and Sørensen, 1972; and Piette et al., 2019b)1 or the nearestmacromolecules. With the general rigid bead-rod theory, we, thus, locate beads and their dimensionless massless rods along molecular chains, including rings, backbones, or branches. In this way, we can model anymacromolecular architecture. To any such collection of masses, we can associate a moment of inertia ellipsoid (MIE) whose center is the center of mass and whose principal moments of inertia match those of the macromolecule. The MIE determines the orientability of the macromolecules and, thus, the polymer contribution to the rheological properties.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.009 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".