Chemical composition and physicochemical and hydrogenation characteristics of high‐palmitic acid solin (low‐linolenic acid flaxseed) oil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The physicochemical characteristics and FA compositions were determined for refined‐bleached‐deodorized (RBD) high‐palmitic acid solin (HPS) oil, RBD solin oil, and degummed linseed oil. The predominant FA in HPS oil were palmitic (16.6%), palmitoleic (1.4%), stearic (2.5%), oleic (11.3%), linoleic (63.7%), and linolenic (3.4%). HPS oil was substantially higher in palmitic acid than either solin oil or linseed oil, and similar to solin oil in linolenic acid content. HPS, solin, and linseed oils exhibited similar sterol and tocopherol profiles. The physicochemical characteristics of the three oils (iodine value, saponification value, m.p., density, specific gravity, viscosity, PV, FFA content, color) reflected their FA profiles and degree of refinement. During hydrogenation of HPS oil, the proportion of saturated FA (palmitic and stearic) increased, and that of unsaturated FA (oleic, linoleic, and linolenic) decreased as the iodine value declined. This resulted in an inverse linear relationship between m.p. and iodine value. Hydrogenation also generated trans FA. The proportion of trans FA was inversely related to iodine value in partially hydrogenated samples. Fully hydrogenated HPS oil (i.e., HPS stearine, iodine value <5) was devoid of trans FA.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".