ArticlePolymers2025
Development of PP Compound Recipes Using Genetic Algorithms and Analytical Models.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study explores the development of polypropylene (PP) compound recipes using analytical models (AM) combined with genetic algorithms (GAs). A talcum-filled PP compound, commonly utilised in injection moulding for packaging applications, served as a reference material, with shear viscosity, tensile modulus, and impact strength selected as target properties for replication. The AM were adapted and fitted to a dataset of 52 compounds, achieving high predictive accuracy for shear viscosity and tensile modulus, while impact strength proved more challenging due to its inherent variability. Three recipes were generated using GA under predefined material constraints. Recipe 1 aimed to replicate all three target properties, achieving a balanced compromise with maximum deviations of 13.14% for tensile modulus and 12.37% for impact strength while closely matching shear viscosity (maximum 9.8% deviation). Recipes 2 and 3, focused solely on matching shear viscosity and impact strength, demonstrated exceptional accuracy for shear viscosity, with Recipe 2 achieving near-perfect alignment (2.5% deviation). However, neither recipe approached the tensile modulus target due to material limitations. The findings demonstrate the effectiveness of combining AM with GA for designing alternative formulations, emphasising the importance of realistic targets and material constraints. This methodology is highly adaptable, allowing for the inclusion of additional optimisation criteria such as cost or sustainability. Future work will explore broader material sets and properties, extending the framework's applicability to technical polymers and diverse industrial applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.