MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968450545 · doi:10.1002/jsfa.1860

Sensory and chemical characteristics of Canadian ice wines

2004· article· en· W1968450545 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFermentation and Sensory Analysis
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTitratable acidAcetic acidChemistryFood scienceVintageIce creamOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fifty‐one Canadian ice wines, representative of a range of varieties and vintages, were evaluated chemically and 20 wines further evaluated sensorally. Ice wines from British Columbia and Ontario were significantly different for a range of chemical and sensory attributes. British Columbia ice wines had higher titratable acidity, acetic acid and glucose, and lower colour and ethyl acetate content compared with those from Ontario. Apricot, raisin, honey and oak aromas were more pronounced in Ontario ice wines, while British Columbia ice wines had higher intensities of pineapple and oxidized aromas. Riesling ice wines had higher titratable acidity and glucose and lower pH and A 420 values compared with Vidal. Vintage effects were also found for pH, A 420 , glucose, fructose, ethanol and ethyl acetate. Copyright © 2004 Society of Chemical Industry

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 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)0.000
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 score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.180 · 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