Sensory Evaluation of Moringa- Probiotic Yogurt Containing Banana, Sweet Potato or Avocado
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
This study evaluated the effects of adding selected fruits and vegetables local to Mwanza, Tanzania on the sensory qualities of probiotic yogurt supplemented with <em>Moringa oleifera,</em> a local tree with a high micronutrient and protein content. A total of five samples were evaluated: 1) Probiotic yogurt (control), 2) <em>Moringa</em> probiotic yogurt, 3) <em>Moringa-</em>banana probiotic yogurt, 4) <em>Moringa</em>-sweet potato<em> </em>probiotic yogurt, and 5) <em>Moringa</em>- avocado probiotic yogurt. Consumers (n= 37) rated the five different samples on a 9-point hedonic scale for four sensory characteristics (flavour, appearance, texture and overall quality). The control sample and the <em>Moringa</em>-banana sample had significantly higher ratings (p&lt;0.05) than the <em>Moringa</em> sample for appearance, flavour, texture and overall quality. The <em>Moringa</em>-banana sample was not found to be significantly different than the control sample for all sensory characteristics (p&gt;0.05). Overall, the addition of banana to <em>Moringa</em> probiotic yogurt resulted in a product with comparable sensory qualities to probiotic yogurt alone.
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 | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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