MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402044658 · doi:10.1155/2024/2159191

Insights into Factors Influencing Thermoplastic Elastomer (TPE) Foam Production and the Role of Induced Crystallization

2024· article· en· W4402044658 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Polymer Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCrystallizationThermoplastic elastomerComposite materialElastomerThermoplasticPolymer scienceChemical engineeringCopolymerPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review provides a comprehensive overview of the multifaceted factors influencing TPE foam production, with a specific focus on the intriguing role of induced crystallization. TPE foams excel in versatility and cost‐effectiveness, yet their production faces several challenges, that significantly impact their final characteristics. The examination encompasses a range of factors, including solubility, diffusivity, interfacial tension, rheology, foaming parameters, nucleating agents, and the intricate influence of induced crystallization on TPE foam structure and performance. In TPE, crystallinity can be induced through various means including gas sorption, stress concentration, extrusion, annealing, and self‐nucleation. These induced crystals serve as nucleation sites for heterogeneous nucleation during foaming. The advancements achieved in polymer foam are thoroughly evaluated in terms of both progress and limitations, drawing insights from various research findings. Furthermore, the review examines recent developments and explores the effects of induced crystallization on TPE foam.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.221 · 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