MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1554842887 · doi:10.35792/zot.32.5.2013.986

SIFAT FISIKO-KIMIA DAN MUTU ORGANOLEPTIK BAKSO BROILER DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN TEPUNG UBI JALAR (Ipomoea batatas L)

2017· article· id· W1554842887 on OpenAlexaff
Siska . Montolalu, Nova Lontaan, Syaloom . Sakul, Arie Dp. Mirah

Bibliographic record

VenueZOOTEC · 2017
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood and Agricultural Sciences
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui efek berbagai prosentase tepung ubi jalar terhadap sifat fisiko-kimia dan mutu organoleptik bakso broiler. Variabel yang diamati adalah sifat fisik dan Sifat Organoleptik bakso. Data untuk semua peubah dianalisis menurut prosedur analisis ragam (ANOVA) dari Rancangan Acak Lengkap dan untuk mengetahui perlakuan mana yang berbeda nyata secara statistik dilakukan pengujian dengan Uji Wilayah Berganda Duncan. Untuk uji organoleptik digunakan metode Scoring Deffrent test dengan jumlah panelis 35 orang. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa penambahan presentase tepung ubi jalar hingga 20% berpengaruh sangat nyata (P<0.01) terhadap Daya Mengikat Air dan Kadar Air. Tapi tidak berpengaruh nyata (P>0.05) terhadap pH. Hasil Organoleptik menunjukkan bahwa perlakuan memberikan pengaruh yang sangat nyata (P<0.01) terhadap tekstur, kekenyalan, dan citarasa. Tapi tidak berpengaruh nyata (P>0.05) terhadap aroma. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dan analisa data dapat disimpulkan bahwa penambahan tepung ubi jalar sebagai filler hingga prosentase 20% menghasilkan bakso broiler dengan sifat fisiko-kimia yang baik dan secara organoleptik dapat diterima oleh konsumen.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations39
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZOOTECSame topicFood and Agricultural SciencesFrench-language works237,207