Polybutylene Succinate Auxetic Membrane Produced by Solution Electrospinning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herein, a simple and cost‐effective method (solution electrospinning) is used to produce auxetic biobased polybutylene succinate membranes. The effect of fiber morphology, orientation, and alignment is investigated on the mechanical properties of the resulting membranes with a focus on Poisson's ratio. The degree of orientation is controlled by increasing the speed of the collector (from 4.03 to 11.01 m s−1) during membrane fabrication. The results indicate that membranes with oriented fibers show a more auxetic behavior than those with randomly orientated fibers. In particular, samples with a high level of alignment and tested in the transverse direction present higher negative Poisson's ratios (down to −5.73) compared to samples tested in the parallel direction (Poisson's ratios down to −2.90). However, samples tested in the transverse direction show lower tensile properties with higher dissipated energy and damping factor. Therefore, the level of fiber orientation and the number of fibers in the transverse and parallel directions are the most important parameters controlling the mechanical properties of electrospun membranes.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".