MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1523106711 · doi:10.1002/jnm.831

Finite element modeling for optimization of microwave heating of in‐shell eggs and experimental validation

2011· article· en· W1523106711 on OpenAlexaff
Satyanarayan Dev, Yvan Gariépy, Valérie Orsat, G. S. V. Raghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Numerical Modelling Electronic Networks Devices and Fields · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Inactivation Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersOffice of International Science and Engineering
KeywordsMicrowave heatingShell (structure)MicrowaveFinite element methodProcess (computing)Nuclear engineeringPasteurizationDesign of experimentsMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringProcess engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceStructural engineeringChemistryMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Considering microwave (MW) heating as a viable alternative for in‐shell pasteurization of eggs, after the simulation of the MW heating process by using a finite element model, process optimization was carried out to determine the most effective procedure and design for the process. The varying parameters obtained by using different modeling techniques for MW heating of in‐shell eggs were optimized. Laboratory‐scale experimental trials were conducted to test the validity and effectiveness of the optimized parameters. The optimal parameters set forth were found to be more efficient in terms of heating time and uniformity. MW heating appeared to be a viable alternative for the pasteurization of in‐shell eggs. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Numerical Modelling Electronic Networks Devices and FieldsSame topicMicrobial Inactivation MethodsFrench-language works237,207