Correction: Brush-like block copolymer synthesized via RAFT polymerization for graphene oxide aqueous suspensions
Min Qiao, Shishan Wu, Yanwei Wang, Qianping Ran
TL;DR
This paper corrects a previously published study on the synthesis of a brush-like block copolymer for stabilizing graphene oxide in water.
Contribution
The correction addresses errors in the original publication to ensure scientific accuracy.
Findings
The original study's details on the synthesis method and results are clarified.
Corrections are made to specific experimental procedures and data presentation.
Abstract
Correction for ‘Brush-like block copolymer synthesized via RAFT polymerization for graphene oxide aqueous suspensions’ by Min Qiao et al., RSC Adv., 2017, 7, 4776–4782, https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RA27480C.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1
Figure 2- —National Natural Science Foundation of China10.13039/501100001809
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Polymer Synthesis and Characterization · Covalent Organic Framework Applications · Graphene research and applications
The authors regret that due to an inappropriate smoothing method used in the generation of Fig. 5 of the original article and the absence of the vertical axis in the figure, the XRD patterns for the three suspensions look very similar. A corrected Fig. 5 is provided here, using the original unsmoothed data with a vertical axis. The peak positions of the three samples are consistent with the description in the original text.
The authors also found that in the process of creating Fig. 7, the data for 3 days was mistakenly reused as the data for 7 days. A corrected Fig. 7 with the correct 7-day data is shown. The conclusion shown in the corrected Fig. 7 is consistent with the description in the original published paper.
An independent expert has viewed the corrected images and the raw data and has concluded that they are consistent with the discussions and conclusions presented.
The Royal Society of Chemistry apologises for these errors and any consequent inconvenience to authors and readers.