MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

BAKING AND SENSORY CHARACTERISTICS OF MUFFINS INCORPORATED WITH APPLE SKIN POWDER

2009· article· en· W1876928653 on OpenAlexaff
H.P. Vasantha Rupasinghe, LAIXIN WANG, Nancy L. Pitts, Tess Astatkie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Quality · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of Agriculture
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIngredientFood scienceFood industryWheat flourDietary fiberHealth benefitsFood additiveFood productsTasteBusinessChemistryMedicineTraditional medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Apple fruit skin, a rich source of dietary fiber and phenolics, is a by‐product of apple processing. The feasibility of incorporating dried apple skin powder (ASP) as a value‐added food ingredient in bakery food products using a model system of muffins was investigated. The blanched, dehydrated and ground ASP was incorporated into muffins at 0, 4, 8, 16, 24 or 32% (w/w) levels with replacement of equivalent amount of wheat flour of a standard muffin mixture. The highest level of replacement (32% w/w) had a significant adverse effect on the baking characteristics. A taste panel of 66 panelists showed that the replacement of wheat flour with 8, 16 or 24% ASP in the muffin mixture did not affect the overall acceptability. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Identification of ways to incorporate apple skins, one of the by‐products of apple pie and sauce manufacturing, as a health food ingredient in human diet could provide many health benefits. Furthermore, better use of the by‐product will also provide benefits to the apple industry as well as solutions for environment concerns associated with disposal. The results of the present study indicate that blanched and dehydrated apple skin powder (ASP) could be considered as an alternative dietary fiber source or specialty food ingredient for muffins. Therefore, the potential for the industrial exploitation of ASP as a health food ingredient for the bakery industry and selected functional foods is promising.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations51
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food QualitySame topicSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsFrench-language works237,207