MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effects of xanthan and guar gums on staling of gluten‐free rice cakes baked in different ovens

2009· article· en· W1961225239 on OpenAlexaff
Gülüm Şümnü, Filiz Köksel, Serpil Şahin, Arzu Başman, Venkatesh Meda

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science & Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
KeywordsGuar gumXanthan gumFood scienceGuarGluten freeRetrogradation (starch)ChemistryGlutenMaterials scienceRheologyStarchComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The objective of this study was to determine the effects of different concentrations of xanthan and guar gums and their blends on staling of gluten‐free rice cakes baked in microwave‐infrared combination oven (MW–IR) and to compare the cakes with conventionally baked ones. Gums were added at concentrations of 0.3% and 1.0%. For preparation of gum blend, 0.5% xanthan gum was mixed with 0.5% guar gum. In order to understand the staling behaviour of cakes, cakes were stored at 22 ± 2 °C for 120 h. Xanthan‐guar gum blend decreased hardness, weight loss, retrogradation enthalpy and the change in setback viscosity values of cakes during storage for both types of ovens as compared to control formulation. It was found that oven type was a significant factor in affecting staling parameters of gluten‐free cakes.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations72
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Science & TechnologySame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207