MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thermogravimetric study of water state in wheat starch gels obtained under high pressures

2010· article· en· W1941211746 on OpenAlexaff
Marta Orłowska, Ewa Utzig, Stanisław L. Randzio

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermogravimetric analysisStarchChemistryIsobaric processDesorptionAmyloseBound waterChemical engineeringVaporizationDiffusionChromatographyThermodynamicsMoleculeOrganic chemistryAdsorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wheat starch gels containing 56.0% of water were obtained during thermal gelatinization under isobaric conditions at different pressures ranging from 0.5 to 100 MPa. Thermogravimetric analysis allowed determination of pressure influence on water behavior in gel matrix. The vaporization rate indicated that water is released in two main steps. The first step corresponds to the diffusion of the water fraction (so-called nonbound water) from the porous structure of the amylose gel located between partially swollen starch granules. However, the second step that appears at higher temperature is related to the desorption of water molecules (bound water), included in the swollen granules. It was observed that the most important influence of pressure on water partitioning in the starch gel took place over a pressure range from 0.5 to 10 MPa. The results obtained indicate that pressure is a thermodynamical parameter, which stabilizes the native state of starch granules.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207