MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998271126 · doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2010.07.002

Gelatinization of waxy starches under high pressure as influenced by pH and osmolarity: Gelatinization kinetics, final structure and pasting properties

2010· article· en· W1998271126 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène Simonin, Claire Guyon, Marta Orłowska, Marie de Lamballerie, Alain Le‐Bail

Bibliographic record

VenueLWT · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwellingStarch gelatinizationRheologyStarchOsmotic concentrationChemistryKineticsChemical engineeringFood scienceMaterials scienceBiochemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the influence of pH and osmolarity on the high-pressure-induced gelatinization of waxy corn and waxy rice starches in salt solutions, and the properties of the resulting gels. Gelatinization kinetics, the gel swelling power of starches, their structure and their rheological properties were studied for starch suspensions treated at 500 MPa. Gelatinization took place mostly in the first 15 min of the pressure treatment and both the gelatinization speed and the maximal level of gelatinized starch decreased with increasing osmolarity. pH had a minor influence on gelatinization kinetics differing from one starch to another. The resulting gels appeared as a mix of a gel and starch granules with a higher proportion of native granules with increasing osmolarity. Gel strength and swelling were positively correlated to their proportion of gelatinized starch. Thus, gels with different structures and gelatinization levels can be obtained under pressure depending on pH and osmolarity.

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 score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations35
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLWTSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207