MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Crystallization of High‐Amylose Starch by the Addition of Plasticizers at Low and Intermediate Concentrations

2009· article· en· W2077327222 on OpenAlexafffund
Yachuan Zhang, Jung H. Han

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsPlasticizerCrystallinityStarchAmyloseMaterials scienceCrystallizationChemical engineeringBiopolymerPolymerPolymer chemistryChemistryOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The antiplasticization effect of plasticizers (that is, polyols and monosaccharides) in starch films was investigated. Pea starch films were plasticized by various polyols and monosaccharides at the levels of 0% to 25% (w/w, plasticizer/starch). After 14 d of storage at 50% relative humidity, the crystallinity of pea starch films increased with increasing concentration of plasticizers from 0% to 20%. Accordingly, moisture content, water vapor permeability, oxygen permeability, and elongation decreased with increasing plasticizer concentration from 0% to 20%, showing the antiplasticization effect. The addition of plasticizers above 20% reduced the crystallinity of starch films, consequently showing the plasticization effect. The results showed that the addition of the plasticizers facilitated the crystallization of the polymer chains through the antiplasticization phenomenon at the concentration range below 15%. Above 20%, plasticizers performed the conventional plasticization effect. Each plasticizer had different critical concentration where the antiplasticization was converted to plasticization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ScienceSame topicNanocomposite Films for Food PackagingFrench-language works237,207