The Role of pH, Ionic Strength and Monomer Concentration on the Terpolymerization of 2-Acrylamido-2-methylpropane Sulfonic Acid, Acrylamide and Acrylic Acid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study examines the effects of important factors (namely, pH, ionic strength and monomer concentration) on the terpolymerization of 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonic acid (AMPS), acrylamide (AAm) and acrylic acid (AAc). A good understanding of how these factor levels affect terpolymerization reactivity ratios, and terpolymer composition, microstructure and molecular weight paves the way for the synthesis of custom-made polymers for specific applications. For the range of conditions studied, ionic strength has the greatest influence on reactivity ratios; results indicate that cross-over behavior exists for AMPS-based reactivity ratios. No clear correlation is observed between pH and reactivity ratio estimates (for 5 ≤ pH ≤ 9), but parameter estimation results suggest that the incorporation of acidic comonomers (AMPS and AAc) is affected by pH within this range. Finally, monomer concentration has a dominant impact on molecular weight averages, even when other factors are varied.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".