A SMALL SCALE LABORATORY NOODLE SHEETING MACHINE<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Rheological properties of cooked noodles made on a small‐scale laboratory sheeting machine developed at the Cereal Research Centre were strongly correlated with the same properties of noodles made on a pilot noodle sheeting machine. Values obtained from both machines were evaluated against 22 laboratory tests used in our breeding program. For example, cooked noodle viscoelasticity (r=0.89, P < 0.01) and cooked noodle cutting force (r = 0.79, P < 0.01) were similar. Cooked noodle viscoelasticity of fresh noodles made on the laboratory machine correlated significantly (P < 0.05) with 17 of the tests and cooked noodle cutting force correlated significantly with 18 tests. Cooked noodle viscoelasticity of dried noodles made with the pilot plant noodle machine had significant correlations (P < 0.05) with only 14 of the tests and cooked noodle cutting force had significant correlations with 15 tests. The pilot plant machine requires a minimum of 500 g for one sample, while the small‐scale sheeting machine requires only 5‐10 g of flour.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".