MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ASSESSMENT OF A WASH TREATMENT WITH WARM CHLORINATED WATER TO EXTEND THE SHELF–LIFE OF READY–TO–USE LETTUCE

2003· article· en· W2016945446 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Quality · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChlorineShelf lifeFood scienceSignificant differenceChemistryPsychrotrophic bacteriaCold storageAnimal scienceHorticultureEnvironmental chemistryBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The influence of a warm chlorine wash on the microbiological quality and shelf–life of ready–to–use (RTU) shredded iceberg lettuce was examined using the electronic nose (EN) and culture methods. There was a significant difference in psychrotrophic counts (P<0.0001) of warm chlorine (100 ppm) washed lettuce at 47 ± 2C for 30 s, 60 s, and 180 s exposure from days 1 to 10 of storage at 4C compared with cold chlorine (100 ppm) washed lettuce at 4 ± 1C for 30 s. There were no significant differences in psychrotrophic counts between wash treatments of 30 s and 60 s during 17 days storage (P < 0.05). The EN detected initially high levels of volatiles in this group compared with cold treatment. Lettuce samples treated with cold or warm chlorine wash water showed no differences in the presence/absence or levels of Listeria monocytogenes. The warm chlorine washed lettuce samples were rated acceptable upon sensory evaluation up to day 14.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.264 · 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