Fat bloom formation and characterization in milk chocolate observed by atomic force microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The surface microstructure and polymorphic behavior of milk chocolate subjected to multiple thermal cycles between 20 and 32, 33, or 34°C were examined using atomic force microscopy (AFM) and powder X‐ray diffraction (XRD). The surface of unbloomed milk chocolate was smooth (surface roughness of 278 nm) and consisted of small, evenly distributed crystals. XRD results indicated the presence of mostly form V crystals and little or no form VI crystals. Cycling between 20 and 32°C resulted in little bloom formation and change in polymorphic behavior. Gradual bloom formation occurred as a result of cycling between 20 and 33°C, and was accompanied by the nascence of form VI crystals. Surface roughness increased gradually from 417 nm after one cycle to 476 and 521 nm after two and three cycles, respectively. Extensive bloom arose from cycling between 20 and 34°C. Surface roughness increased from 373 nm after one cycle to 603 and 736 nm after two and three cycles, respectively. This heavily bloomed chocolate consisted of jutting crystals and large raised, yet smooth areas that were haphazardly located within the chocolate matrix. In summary, a new perspective on the development of surface bloom due to thermal cycling is provided.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".