MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022865199 · doi:10.1094/cchem-01-13-0004-fi

On the Building Block and Backbone Concepts of Amylopectin Structure

2013· article· en· W2022865199 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

VenueCereal Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmylopectinAmyloseChemistryStarchPolymerPolymer scienceSugarPolysaccharideGranule (geology)Organic chemistryPolymer chemistryChemical engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The molecular structure of the starch components has been a focus of research since it was discovered that starch is transformed into sugar by treatment with acid or barley malt extract in the beginning of the 19th century. Only in 1940 was it definitely recognized that starch contains two glucan polymers, wherein amylose was defined as the linear component and amylopectin as the branched polymer. Since then, the structure of amylopectin has been exhaustively investigated, and during the years several models have been suggested, of which the cluster model has obtained the most acceptance. During the last decade, however, experimental results have been obtained that are not entirely in favor of this model, and an alternative, two‐directional backbone model was proposed. This article discusses the latter model and its impact on our understanding of the structure, properties, and synthesis of the starch granule.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.847

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.226 · 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