The Effect of Cellulose Nanocrystal Reassembly on Latex-Based Pressure-Sensitive Adhesive Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different cellulose nanocrystal (CNC) forms (dried vs never-dried) can lead to different degrees of CNC reassembly, the formation of nanofibril-like structures, in nanocomposite latex-based pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA) formulations. CNC reassembly is also affected by CNC sonication and loading as well as the protocol used for CNC addition to the polymerization. In this study, carboxylated CNCs (cCNCs) were incorporated into a seeded, semibatch, 2-ethylhexyl acrylate/methyl methacrylate/styrene emulsion polymerization and cast as pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA) films. The addition of CNCs led to a simultaneous increase in tack strength, peel strength, and shear adhesion, avoiding the typical trade-off between the adhesive and cohesive strength. Increased CNC reassembly resulted from the use of dried, redispersed, and sonicated cCNCs, along with increased cCNC loading and addition of the cCNCs at the seed stage of the polymerization. The increased degree of CNC reassembly was shown to significantly increase the shear adhesion by enhancing the elastic modulus of the PSA films.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".