PERFIL SENSORIAL DE AGUARDENTE DE CANA EM FUNÇÃO DA DILUIÇÃO E VARIAÇÃO DA ACIDEZ DA AMOSTRA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estudou-se a influência da concentração alcoólica e da acidez no perfil de percepção sensorial de aguardente de cana, visando detectar igualdades ou diferenças na avaliação de atributos típicos de aroma e sabor do produto. Utilizou-se aguardente recémdestilada, que foi submetida a diluição e acidificação com ácido succínico, originando quatro amostras para provas. Concluiu-se que a concentração alcoólica e a acidez não influíram na avaliação sensorial dos atributos típicos da aguardente. A diluição da aguardente não contribuiu para a maximização da percepção de diferenças entre o aroma e o sabor das duas amostras. A variação da acidez não mascarou a expressão sensorial dos atributos devido aos componentes secundários da aguardente, representados principalmente por aldeídos, alcoóis superiores, ésteres e ácidos orgânicos. SENSORY PROFILE OF SUGARCANE SPIRIT IN FUNCTION TO SAMPLE DILUTION AND ACIDITY VARIATION Abstract The influence of alcoholic concentration and acidity on the sensory perception profile of sugarcane spirit was studied, aiming to detect similarities and differences in the evaluation of product flavor and aroma typical attributes. Recent prepared sugarcane spirit was utilized, which was submitted to dilution and acidification with succinic acid, originating four samples for tests. It was concluded that the alcoholic concentration and acidity didnt influence the sensory evaluation of the typical attributes of the spirit. The spirit dilution didnt contribute for the maximization of differences perception among aroma and flavor of two samples. The acidity variation didnt disguise the attributes sensory expression due to the secondary components of the spirit, represented mainly by aldehydes, superior alcohols, esters and organic acids.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".