Continuous nanoprecipitation of poly(D,L-lactide) in a rotor–stator spinning disk reactor
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The demand for polymeric nanoparticles is increasing as more and more studies showcase the efficacy of nano-sized drug delivery systems. However, current technologies struggle to produce these nanoparticles on a scale sufficiently large for clinical trials or industry. We have developed a continuous nanoprecipitation process for poly(D,L-lactide) in a rotor–stator spinning disk reactor that produces uniform (dispersity < 0.2) nanoparticles (56 nm to 132 nm) at higher rates (up to 864 g d −1 ) than many other available technologies. The particle size can be predicted according to the diffusion limited coalescence model ( R 2 = 0.89) in the slow mixing regime. Molecular weight (between 1 kDa to 54 kDa) and total flowrate (between 48 mL min −1 to 120 mL min −1 ) had no effect on particle size. We also fit a statistical power-law model ( R 2 = 0.88) that predicts particle size in relation to the experimental parameters (concentration of polymer in the aqueous phase, rotational speed, flowrate ratio between the organic and aqueous phase). Polymer concentration in the organic phase and disk rotation are the dominant factors influencing size while the flowrate ratio has one-third their impact.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it