Thermoresponsive Behaviors of Poly(<i>N</i>-methacryloyl glycinamide) and Poly(<i>N</i>-acryloyl glycinamide): Effect of Methacrylation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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".