Structure and Physical Properties of Plant Wax Crystal Networks and Their Relationship to Oil Binding Capacity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The microstructure, melting and crystallization behavior, rheological properties and oil binding capacity of crystalline networks of plant‐derived waxes in edible oil were studied and then compared amongst different wax types. The critical concentrations for oleogelation of canola oil by rice bran wax (RBX), sunflower wax, candelilla wax, and carnauba wax were 1, 1, 2, and 4 %, respectively, suggesting RBX and sunflower wax are more efficient structurants. A phenomenological two‐phase exponential decay model was implemented to quantify the oil‐binding capacity of these oleogels. Parameters obtained from this empirical model were then evaluated against microscale structural attributes such as crystal size, mass distribution and porosity to determine the structural dependence of oil‐binding capacity. Gels containing candelilla wax exhibited the greatest oil‐binding capacity, as they retained nearly 90 % of their oil. This is due to the small crystal size as well as the spatial distribution of these crystals. Using a microscopic to macroscopic approach, this study examines how the structural characteristics unique to each wax and resulting oleogel system affect functionality and macroscopic behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it