Quality changes during spouted bed drying of Pepper‐Rosmarin extract
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study was undertaken in order to evaluate the effects of processing and feed composition variables on the retention of volatile compounds and product properties during spouted bed drying of pepper‐rosmarin extract (Lippia sidoides Cham.). The product loss on drying, LD, moisture content, Xp, water activity, Aw, concentration of bioactive markers (flavonoid, TF, polyphenol, TPF and thymol contents, TT), antioxidant activity, IC50, powder flow properties, powder morphology and crystalline state were the responses analysed. Processing conditions and feed composition significantly affected the product quality, leading to noticeable changes in the retention of bioactive substances. Results of this study show that the concentration of bioactive markers in the dried product tended to increase with the feed flow rate of the feed composition relative to the maximum dryer evaporation capacity, Ws/Wmax, and conversely with the concentration of drying carriers added to the feed composition. The dried extract showed significant antioxidant activity, although significant losses of bioactive marker compounds (TF, TPF and TT) were observed in some processing conditions.
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".