Influence of Quinoa Flour on Quality Characteristics of Cookie, Bread and <scp>C</scp>hinese Steamed Bread
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Quinoa has unique physicochemical and nutritional properties among diverse food grains. Quinoa flour ( QF ) was blended into wheat flour ( WF ) at weight ratios of 85/15, 70/30, 55/45, 40/60, 25/75 and 10/90 to formulate composite flour for the production of cookie, bread and C hinese steamed bread ( CSB ). Physicochemical properties of quinoa–wheat composite flour ( QWCF ) and quality characteristics of the bakery products were characterized. The feasibility of using QF in CSB making was explored for the first time. Compared with products of WF , the resulting products from QWCF had reduced specific volume, and increased density, hardness and chewiness of the texture, darkness, redness, and yellowness of the color. The mold‐free shelf life of bread and CSB increased as a function of QF level. The influence of QF addition on the physicochemical properties of bakery products is product‐type sensitive. Practical Applications Addition of quinoa flour diversifies wheat flour products with certain modification on physicochemical and nutritional qualities, and thus could expand both flours in overall food applications. These findings could provide some insights for industrial research and development using quinoa grain for novel bakery products.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it