Mechanical and Microstructural Properties of “Wet” Alginate and Composite Films Containing Various Carbohydrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composite "wet" alginate films were manufactured from alginate-carbohydrate solutions containing 5% alginate and 0.25% pectin, carrageenan (kappa or iota), potato starch (modified or unmodified), gellan gum, or cellulose (extracted or commercial). The "wet" alginate films were used as a model to understand co-extruded alginate sausage casings that are currently being used by several sausage manufacturers. The mechanical, optical, and microstructural properties of the calcium cross-linked composite films were explored. In addition, the water holding capacity and textural profile analysis properties of the alginate-carbohydrate gels were studied. The results indicate that the mechanical properties of "wet" alginate films/casings can be modified by adding various carbohydrates to them. Alginate films with pectin, carrageenan, and modified potato starch had significantly (P < 0.05) greater elongation values than pure alginate films. The alginate-pectin films also had greater (P < 0.05) tensile strengths than the pure alginate films. Alginate films with extracted cellulose, commercial cellulose, and modified potato starch had lower (P < 0.05) puncture force, distance, and work values than the alginate control films. Transmission electron microscopy images showed a very uniform alginate network in the control films. Several large cellulose fibers were visible in the films with extracted cellulose, while the cellulose fibers in the films with commercial cellulose were difficult to distinguish. Despite these apparent differences in cellulose fiber length, the 2 cellulose films had similar puncture and tensile properties.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".