MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388841742 · doi:10.1177/0021955x231215753

Polystyrene carbon composite foam with enhanced insulation and fire retardancy for a sustainable future: Critical review

2023· article· en· W4388841742 on OpenAlexaff
Apurv Gaidhani, Lauren Tribe, Paul A. Charpentier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cellular Plastics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialComposite numberPolystyreneThermal insulationThermal conductivityCarbon blackBlowing agentCarbon fibersCarbon nanofoamFlammabilityPolyurethanePolymerPorosityNatural rubber

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polystyrene (PS) composite foams are an intriguing class of materials that are well established for thermal insulation in construction and lightweight recyclable components in automotives. Research has shown the remarkable properties of these foams in terms of thermal and sound insulation and fire retardancy that can be enhanced by incorporating carbon fillers such as graphite, graphene, and biochar. Several methods have been examined by researchers to mix carbon with the polystyrene matrix and prepare PS carbon composite foams, which can broadly be categorized into suspension polymerization, solution mixing and melt blending. These methodologies along with foaming techniques for the expansion of PS using various blowing agents are reviewed. We also review the most relevant research studies in the field of PS carbon composite foams for insulation (thermal and sound) and fire retardancy. Due to its high infrared radiation absorption capacity and hetero nucleating action, expandable graphite and graphene can lead to excellent thermal and sound insulation along with fire retardancy in a PS foam, thus resulting in significant energy savings in a building. Biochar, due to its inherent low thermal conductivity and nucleating action, modifies the foam morphology, leading to enhanced heat and sound absorption and thus is a low-cost renewable carbon alternative that promotes the circular economy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cellular PlasticsSame topicPolymer Foaming and CompositesFrench-language works237,207