Desarrollo de membranas poliméricas con propiedades Antifouling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El objetivo de este proyecto es conocer las propiedades antifouling de las membranas de Poliacrilonitrilo y sus copolímeros y compararlas con las membranas que son usadas en la actualidad, además de recopilar información sobre los métodos existentes en la actualidad de modificación de membranas para la reducción del fouling. Las membranas de Poliacrilonitrilo se ensucian rápidamente debido a la pobre hidrofilicidad y biocompatibilidad que poseen por lo que prepararemos membranas de Poliacrilonitrilo copolimerizado con diferentes monómeros hidrofílicos tales como: Ácido 2-Acrilamido-2-Metilpropano-Sulfónico y Vinilsulfonato Sódico. La resistencia al fouling de estas membranas será comparada con la de una membrana comercial de Polisulfona suministrada por la empresa Alfa Laval, más concretamente el modelo GPRSS y también con una membrana fabricada a partir de un copolímero comercial de Aldrich P(AN/APSA) 95-5.Para medir la resistencia antifouling se ha ensayado las membranas con agua destilada y con una disolución de Seroalbúmina bovina (1g/L) y agua destilada, a través de un dispositivo simple para medidas de flujo nominal. Se comentarán los resultados obtenidos en nuestros ensayos además de comprobar si se han mejorado o no las propiedades antifouling de nuestras membranas. ________________________________________________________________________________________
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".