Optimum Processing Conditions of Instant Asian Noodles in Superheated Steam
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is little information in the literature about what constitutes an acceptable instant noodle. To ascertain the commercial acceptability of superheated steam-processed instant noodles, a sampling of commercial products was undertaken. Noodles processed at a steam velocity of 1.5 m/s and at 125°C for 200 s, 130°C for 167 s, 135°C for 150 s, 140°C for 133 s, 150°C for 100 s, and a steam velocity of 1.0 m/s and 150°C for 133 s had acceptable color values (L∗ values greater than 63, a∗ values less than 0, and b∗ values above 20) and moisture at or below the safe storage limit. Superheated steam processed noodles were more firm and chewy than the commercial noodles. Adhesiveness, springiness, and resilience were generally the same for all noodle products. Breaking strength of superheated steam processed noodles was in the same range as the fried control and commercial products. Values varied from a low of 1121 ± 194 g/mm2 for noodles processed at 150°C, 1.5 m/s, for 100 s to a high of 1575 ± 329 g/mm2 for noodles processed at 140°C, 1.5 m/s, for 133 s. Starch gelatinization was greatest in the fried control samples and the least in the superheated steam processed samples (approximately 9% less).
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it