Mechanical and biodegradability of porous PCL/PEG copolymer-reinforced cellulose nanofibers for soft tissue engineering applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design and development of a new class of biomaterial has gained particular interest in producing polymer scaffold for biomedical applications. Mechanical properties, biological and controlling pores scaffold of the biomaterials are important factors to encourage cell growth and eventual tissue repair and regeneration. In this study, poly-ε-caprolactone (PCL) /polyethylene glycol (PEG) copolymer (80/20) incorporated with CNF scaffolds were made employing solvent casting and particulate leaching methods. Four mass percentages of CNF (1, 2.5, 5, and 10 wt.%) were integrated into the copolymer through a silane coupling agent. Mechanical properties were determined using Tensile Tester data acquisition to investigate the effect of porosity, pore size, and CNF contents. Tensile strength obtained for PCL/PEG- 5 wt.% CNF was 16 MPa, which drastically decreased after creating a porous structure to 7.1 MPa. The optimum parameters of the results were found to be 5 wt.% for CNF, 240 μm for pore size, and 83% for porosity. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) micrograph reveals that consistent pore size and regular pore shape were accomplished after the addition of CNF-5 wt.% into PCL/PEG. The results of mass loss of PCL/PEG reinforced-CNF 1 % have clearly enhanced to double values compared with PCL/PEG copolymer and three times with PCL/PEG scaffold-CNF 1 %. In addition, all PCL/PEG reinforced and scaffold- CNF were partially disintegrated under composting conditions confirming their biodegradable behavior. This also provides a possible solution for the end life of these biomaterials.
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) | 0.000 | 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".