MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409953977 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.5c00037

Thermoresponsive Behaviors of Poly(<i>N</i>-methacryloyl glycinamide) and Poly(<i>N</i>-acryloyl glycinamide): Effect of Methacrylation

2025· article· en· W4409953977 on OpenAlexafffund
Guillaume Beaudoin, Adrien Herrero, Christian Pellerin, X. X. Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPolymer chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poly( N -acryloyl glycinamide) (PNAGA) proves to be an interesting and useful polymer with an upper critical solution temperature (UCST) behavior in water due to intra- and intermolecular hydrogen bonding. Its methacrylamide counterpart, poly( N -methylacryloyl glycinamide) (PNMAGA), has a different UCST behavior, which is easier to dissolve in water. In this work, PNMAGA and PNAGA were synthesized by RAFT polymerization and free radical polymerization, and their solution properties in dilute aqueous media have been studied and compared in detail to elucidate the effects of temperature, polymer concentration, molecular weight, and chain end. The direct comparison provides a better understanding of the UCST behaviors. The presence of an extra methyl group on the repeating unit helps the polymer to dissolve better and eliminates the need for special thermal treatment to obtain a complete dissolution. Infrared spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction analysis show variation in hydrogen bonds between the two polymers and their respective monomers, providing insights into the structural origin of their different solution properties.

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 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207