AACCI Approved Methods Technical Committee Report: A New AACCI Approved Method for the Determination of the Total Carotenoid Content of Cereal Whole Grain and Refined Flours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new AACCI Approved Method for the determination of total carotenoid content in cereal whole grain or refined flours has been developed and validated. The method is based on extraction of carotenoids with water-saturated butanol and subsequent spectrophotometric measurement using lutein as a standard. Because total carotenoids are expressed as lutein equivalents it is crucial to verify the purity of the lutein standard to be able to produce consistent results among different laboratories. Fifteen labs participated in the collaborative study, and six grain materials, including einkorn, durum, red wheat, white wheat, and yellow corn, were used to evaluate method performance. The RSDr and RSDR values were <5%, and the HorRat values were very low, ranging from 0.28 to 0.37, indicating high precision and reliability. In general the new method provides a simple and reliable procedure that would be useful in the development of high-carotenoid wheat or corn as functional food ingredients with health-promoting ef...
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 | 0.025 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.065 |
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".