Topological effects on the Lifshitz point of block copolymer/homopolymer blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of copolymer topology on the phase behavior of binary blends containing AB-type block copolymers and A homopolymers is studied by examining the instability modes of the system using the random-phase approximation. Depending on the concentration of the homopolymers, the blends could undergo microscopic or macroscopic phase separation, forming one ordered phase or two coexisting phases. The transition between these two distinct behaviors occurs at the Lifshitz point (LP), at which the wavelength of the most unstable mode diverges. We demonstrate that AB-type copolymers with identical block compositions but distinct chain topologies have different abilities to solubilize homopolymers, and their LPs exhibit two distinct, continuous (second-order) or discontinuous (first-order), features connected by a tricritical point. A more complex behavior featuring the coexistence of two instability modes with different finite length scales is also observed in multiblock copolymer/homopolymer blends. These behaviors are shown to be independent of specific chain models.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".