Diffusion of Acetic and Propionic Acids from Chitosan‐based Antimicrobial Packaging Films
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The diffusion of acetic or propionic acids from thin (44 to 54 μm) chitosan‐based antimicrobial packaging films in which they were incorporated was measured after immersion of the films in water, and the effects of pH (5.7, 6.4, or 7.0) and temperature (4 °C, 10 °C, or 24 °C) on diffusion were investigated. The kinetics of acetic‐ and propionic‐acid release deviated from the Fickian model of diffusion. Diffusion was found to be unaffected by pH in the range of values tested, but a decrease in temperature from 24 °C to 4 °C resulted in a reduction of diffusion coefficients from 2.59 × 10 −12 m 2 .s −1 to 1.19 × 10 −12 m 2 .s −1 for acetic acid and from 1.87 × 10 −12 m 2 .s −1 to 0.91 × 10 −12 m 2 .s −1 for propionic acid. The effect of temperature on diffusion was well (r 2 > 0.9785) described by an Arrhenius‐type model with activation energies of 27.19 J.mole −1 (acetic) and 24.27 J.mole −1 (propionic). Incorporation of lauric acid or essential oils (cinnamaldehyde or eugenol) into the chitosan film at the time of preparation produced a subsequent reduction in the diffusion of acetic or propionic acid, and maximum effects were obtained with lauric acid and cinnamaldehyde incorporated to final concentrations of 1.0% and 0.5% (w/w), respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it