Nutritive Value and Sensory Evaluation of Airline Breakfast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose/Objectives: This study was conducted to assess the nutritive value of Libyan airline breakfast in comparison with the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) and to conduct sensory evaluation of selected items on board the flights. Design/Methodology: Food samples were collected from the catering department of Benina International airport, Benghazi, Libya for a period of two months and nutritive value was calculated. A self administered questionnaire prepared on the basis of the Hedonic scale was used for inflight sensory evaluation of selected snacks. Findings: The results on nutritive value of snacks revealed higher amounts of energy, carbohydrates, saturated fat and sodium in comparison to the RDA when the full day’s meal was considered. Micronutrients such as vitamins A, E, C and folic acid fell short of RDA. Sensory evaluation revealed that a majority of the travelers disliked most of the breakfast items except juice. Practical implications: The airline needs to improve the micronutrient content of snacks, simultaneously reducing the total energy and sodium content and replacing saturated fat to prevent health risks to regular airline passengers. Also palatability need not be compromised in light of safety of food items served.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".