Porosity, Bulk Density, and Volume Reduction During Drying: Review of Measurement Methods and Coefficient Determinations
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
Several experimental methods for measuring porosity, bulk density, and volume reduction during drying of foodstuffs are available. These methods include, among others, geometric dimension, volume displacement, mercury porosimeter, micro-CT, and NMR. However, data on their accuracy, sensitivity, and appropriateness are scarce. This article reviews these experimental methods, areas of applications, and limits. In addition, the concept of porosity, bulk density, and volume reduction and their evolution as a function of moisture content during drying are presented. In this study, values of initial porosity (ϵ0) and density ratio (β) of some food products are summarized. It has been found that ϵ0 is highly dependent on the type of food products, while β ranges from 1.1 to 1.6. The possibility of calculating solid density based on food compositions has also been validated. The inter-predictions between porosity, bulk density, and volume density have been made mathematically evident.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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