Edible oil structures at low and intermediate concentrations. I. Modeling, computer simulation, and predictions for X ray scattering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Triacylglycerols (TAGs) are biologically important molecules which form the recently discovered highly anisotropic crystalline nanoplatelets (CNPs) and, ultimately, the large-scale fat crystal networks in edible oils. Identifying the hierarchies of these networks and how they spontaneously self-assemble is important to understanding their functionality and oil binding capacity. We have modelled CNPs and studied how they aggregate under the assumption that all CNPs are present before aggregation begins and that their solubility in the liquid oil is very low. We represented CNPs as rigid planar arrays of spheres with diameter ≈50 nm and defined the interaction between spheres in terms of a Hamaker coefficient, A, and a binding energy, VB. We studied three cases: weak binding, |VB|/kBT ≪ 1, physically realistic binding, VB = Vd(R, Δ), so that |VB|/kBT ≈ 1, and Strong binding with |VB|/kBT ≫ 1. We divided the concentration of CNPs, ϕ, with 0≤ϕ= 10−2 (solid fat content) ≤1, into two regions: Low and intermediate concentrations with 0<ϕ<0.25 and high concentrations with 0.25 < ϕ and considered only the first case. We employed Monte Carlo computer simulation to model CNP aggregation and analyzed them using static structure functions, S(q). We found that strong binding cases formed aggregates with fractal dimension, D, 1.7≤D≤1.8, in accord with diffusion limited cluster-cluster aggregation (DLCA) and weak binding formed aggregates with D=3, indicating a random distribution of CNPs. We found that models with physically realistic intermediate binding energies formed linear multilayer stacks of CNPs (TAGwoods) with fractal dimension D=1 for ϕ=0.06,0.13, and 0.22. TAGwood lengths were greater at lower ϕ than at higher ϕ, where some of the aggregates appeared as thick CNPs. We increased the spatial scale and modelled the TAGwoods as rigid linear arrays of spheres of diameter ≈500 nm, interacting via the attractive van der Waals interaction. We found that TAGwoods aggregated via DLCA into clusters with fractal dimension D=1.7−1.8. As the simulations were run further, TAGwoods relaxed their positions in order to maximize the attractive interaction making the process look like reaction limited cluster-cluster aggregation with the fractal dimension increasing to D=2.0−2.1. For higher concentrations of CNPs, many TAGwood clusters were formed and, because of their weak interactions, were distributed randomly with D=3.0. We summarize the hierarchy of structures and make predictions for X-ray scattering.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".