MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FOAM‐MAT FREEZE‐DRYING OF APPLE JUICE
PART 1: EXPERIMENTAL DATA AND ANN SIMULATIONS

2009· article· en· W2085187738 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Process Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMicroencapsulation and Drying Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsFreeze-dryingMaterials scienceProcess (computing)Vacuum dryingChemistryChromatographyPulp and paper industryFood scienceComposite materialProcess engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Freeze‐drying of foamed and nonfoamed apple juice was studied in order to assess if there is a reduction in process time due to foaming. Foams were prepared by whipping apple juice with methylcellulose or egg albumin at different concentrations. Foamed and nonfoamed juice samples having different thickness and different initial weight were frozen at −40C and then freeze‐dried at 20C during 48 h under vacuum. Sample weight loss and temperature were followed at different process times. A mathematical model based on artificial neural networks was developed to represent foam kinetics and temperature curves during freeze‐drying. Foaming reduced process time if the comparison was done at equal sample thickness. However, lower density of foamed materials decreases weight load to the dryer. Unfortunately, the optimization of the process did not permit the determination of a practical minimal foam sample thickness to enhance both drying rate and dryer throughput. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Fruit juice powders have a large application in the food and nutraceutical industries. These powders are used as instant beverages, ingredients for bakery or extruded products and to incorporate in pharmaceutical tablets. Freeze‐drying is an excellent process to obtain a high‐quality fruit juice powder because it offers extraordinary nutritional, structure and sensorial qualities when compared with products of alternative drying process: air, vacuum, microwave and osmotic drying. However, the process cost is expensive due to the long drying times under vacuum. Process acceleration through optimization is therefore necessary in order to obtain high quality in the final products but at lower costs. This study aims to decrease the cost of the freeze‐drying process by using foaming prior to processing to increase the drying rate.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.226 · 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