MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046560697 · doi:10.2202/1556-3758.1636

Extraction of Ginsenosides from American Ginseng (Panax quinquefolium L.) Root

2010· article· en· W2046560697 on OpenAlex
Jianming Dai, Valérie Orsat

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

VenueInternational Journal of Food Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGinseng Biological Effects and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtraction (chemistry)ChromatographyAmerican ginsengGinsengGinsenosideChemistryAraliaceaeSolventSample preparationMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microwave-assisted extraction (MAE) was compared with room temperature extraction (RTE) and reflux temperature extraction (RFX) on the extraction of ginsenosides from fresh American ginseng root. The influence of various factors, i.e. extraction method, solvent type, solvent to sample ratio, extraction time, and the size of sample particles on the extraction of ginsenosides Re, mRb1, Rb1 and total ginsenosides was studied. An 86 to 300% increase in extraction rate was observed with extraction under raised temperature in the microwave. Using microwave energy instead of hotplate-heating for the extraction resulted in a 31 to 96% increase in extraction rate. Visual analysis of the chromatograms of extracts can help the selection of extracting conditions for selectively obtaining specific ginsenosides enriched extracts.

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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.247 · 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