MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Discrimination of Volatiles of Refined and Whole Wheat Bread Containing Red and White Wheat Bran Using an Electronic Nose

2012· article· en· W2066426660 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

VenueJournal of Food Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBranElectronic noseFood scienceWhole wheatWheat flourWheat breadChemistryBread makingMathematicsRaw materialMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: The principal objective of this study was to evaluate the capability of electronic (E) nose technology to discriminate refined and whole wheat bread made with white or red wheat bran according to their headspace volatiles. Whole wheat flour was formulated with a common refined flour from hard red spring wheat, blended at the 15% replacement level with bran milled from representative samples of one hard red and 2 hard white wheats. A commercial formula was used for breadmaking. Results varied according to the nature of the sample, that is, crust, crumb, or whole slices. Bread crust and crumb were completely discriminated. Crumb of whole wheat bread made with red bran was distinct from other bread types. When misclassified, whole wheat bread crumb with white bran was almost invariably identified as refined flour bread crumb. Using crust as the basis for comparisons, the largest difference in volatiles was between refined flour bread and whole wheat bread as a group. When refined flour bread crust was misclassified, samples tended to be confused with whole white wheat crust. Samples prepared from whole bread slices were poorly discriminated in general. E-nose results indicated that whole wheat bread formulated with white bran was more similar in volatile makeup to refined flour bread compared to whole wheat bread made with red bran. The E-nose appears to be very capable to accommodate differentiation of bread volatiles whose composition varies due to differences in flour or bran type. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Consumer preference of bread made using refined flour in contrast to whole wheat flour is partly due to the different aroma of whole wheat bread. This study used an electronic nose to analyze bread volatiles, and showed that whole wheat bread incorporating white bran was different from counterpart bread made using red bran, and was closer in volatile makeup to "white" bread made without bran. Commercial millers and bakers can take advantage of these results to formulate whole wheat flour with brans of preferred type in order to foster increased consumption of whole wheat products which confer many favorable health benefits.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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