Chemical transformations during mechanoactivation of ε‐polylysine‐poly‐L‐lactic acid mixture to obtain amphiphilic copolymers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study presents a new strategy for the preparation of amphiphilic copolymers of ε‐polylysine (PL) and poly‐L‐lactic acid (PLA) using one‐step pulsed mechanochemical approach. Correlation between the synthesis parameters (ratio of homopolymers) and the structure of the resulting copolymers has been studied. The interaction products were characterized by nuclear magnetic resonance, Infrared spectroscopy, size‐exclusion chromatography, by varying the mass ratio of the initial homopolymers (PL:PLA = 10:90; 50:50; 90:10). It is shown that the largest number of product yield is formed in a ratio of homopolymers of 50:50, according to the reaction of aminolysis of polyesters. The dynamic light scattering method, transmission electron microscopy, and small‐angle x‐ray scattering were used to characterize nanoscale structures of copolymer macromolecules in aqueous solvent. As a result of pulsed mechanochemical action at all three ratios of homopolymers (PL:PLA = 10:90; 50:50; 90:10 w/w), the aminolysis reaction of the ester group occurs and branched macromolecules of copolymers are formed, which consist of chemically related sequences of homopolymers—main chain—PL, side branches—PLA. However, the maximum yield of the amphiphilic copolymer was 90 wt% with a PL:PLA ratio of 50:50. This study can serve as the development of important areas: deepen knowledge in the field of mechanochemical synthesis of amphiphilic copolymers.
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".