Understanding and Modeling the Processing‐Mechanical Property Relationship of Bread Crumb Assessed by Indentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Measuring fundamental mechanical parameters such as Young's modulus and critical stress is a straightforward and valid approach to evaluating the physical texture of breadcrumb. The objectives of this study were to evaluate whether such fundamental mechanical properties could be measured by indentation techniques such as the AACC crumb firmness method, and then to alter breadmaking conditions so as to model the relationship between these indentation mechanical properties as a function of crumb moisture content and crumb density. Bread was baked according to a short dough process using Canadian western red spring (CWRS) wheat flour. Factors considered in the design of experiments were proofing time, water absorption, crosshead speed, and indenter diameter. Young's modulus and critical stress, measured with 12‐ and 20‐mm cylindrical indenters, were well covalidated with those obtained from a standard compression test. With increases in proofing time and water absorption, a more porous and compliant bread texture led to decreasing Young's modulus and critical stress. Our results revealed a good mapping of mechanical properties to crumb moisture content and density that were correlated to breadmaking conditions, thus permitting more precise prediction of the mechanical properties that determine bread texture.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".