Effect of hyperbaric treatments on the quality attributes of tomato
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Goyette, B., Vigneault, C., Charles, M. T. and Raghavan, V. G. S. 2012. Effect of hyperbaric treatments on the quality attributes of tomato. Can. J. Plant Sci. 92: 541–551. An experimental hyperbaric system was conceptualized, designed and built to explore the effect of hyperbaric treatment on the quality attributes of tomato. Tomato fruits at the early breaker stage were subjected to hyperbaric pressures of 1, 3, 5, 7 or 9 atmabsfor different durations (5, 10 or 15 d) at 13°C. The effect of hyperbaric treatment on postharvest quality of tomato fruit was evaluated with an emphasis on weight loss, firmness, color, titratable acidity (TA) and total soluble solids (TSS). Hyperbaric treated tomato fruit ripened more slowly and were characterized by lower respiration rate than fruits kept under ambient conditions. Significant differences in weight loss, color, lycopene concentration and firmness were found between hyperbaric treated and control tomato fruit. No significant difference was found in the sugar/acid ratio (TSS/TA).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".