Proximate Composition, Physical and Sensory Properties of Cake Prepared from Wheat and Cocoyam Flour Blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of replacing wheat flour with cocoyam (Xanthosoma sagittifolium) flour on the proximate composition, physical, sensory properties of cake were investigated. Baking trials were conducted at different levels of substitution (0, 20, 40, 50, 60, 80 and 100%). Cocoyam flour had higher values (p < 0.05) in all functional characteristics evaluated except for emulsifying capacity. Cake weights and volume increased with increasing cocoyam flour substitution while volume index decreased. Protein and fat contents of cake samples decreased (p< 0.05) with increasing levels of cocoyam flour substitution while ash and fibre contents increased. There was no significant (p > 0.05) difference in crust colour of samples. In terms of textural preference, cake prepared from 100% cocoyam flour was significantly higher than 100% wheat cake. Utilization of wheat-cocoyam flour blends in composite cake preparation will be beneficial to the nutrition of vulnerable groups considering the higher ash and fiber contents of of composite cake, and reduced carbohydrate and fat contents than control.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".