Influence of Alkaline Formulation on Oriental Noodle Color and Texture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Patent (60% yield) and straight‐grade flours of Canada Western Red Spring (CWRS) and Canada Prairie Spring White (CPSW) wheat were used to determine the influence of different ratios of alkaline salts, their concentration, and NaCl on the texture and color characteristics of the yellow alkaline noodles. Addition of 3% (w/w) salt to any formulation resulted in a significant increase in the amount of work required to process the raw noodles, while significantly lower work input was observed for noodles prepared using a 5% (w/w) 9:1 Na‐to‐K carbonate ratio without salt formula. Wheat class, extraction rate, and alkali formulation had a significant effect on raw noodle brightness with noodles prepared using 5% carbonate being brighter than the 1% carbonate noodles. Maximum cooked noodle thickness was achieved from all flours using a 1% 9:1 Na‐to‐K carbonate ratio, 3% salt formulation. The inclusion of 3% NaCl into the formula resulted in noodles significantly thicker than the corresponding salt‐free formula for all flours. Cooked noodle texture parameters evaluated were maximum cutting stress (MCS), resistance to compression (RTC), recovery (REC), and stress relaxation time. In all cases, the presence of 3% salt in the various formulations resulted in a decrease in each parameter relative to the corresponding salt‐free formulation. Desirable bite (MCS), chewiness (RTC, REC), and relaxation times were achieved with a 1% concentration of alkali salts, without NaCl, regardless of the Na‐to‐K carbonate ratio. Use of a 5% concentration of alkali salts resulted in a significant reduction in texture that was most pronounced for the 1:9 Na‐to‐K carbonate formulation.
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".