MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EVALUATION OF LENTIL TEXTURE MEASUREMENTS BY COMPRESSION TESTING

2000· article· en· W2111270009 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 Texture Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCanadian International Grains Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsTexture (cosmology)Compression (physics)Sample size determinationSample (material)StatisticsMathematicsMaterials scienceComposite materialArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceChromatographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The variability in texture for lentils of different size, from different locations and cooked for varying lengths of time was examined in relation to the sample size and the extent to which the sample was compressed during testing. The force to compress the lentils was found to be dependent on all variables examined and also demonstrated significant interactions between these variables. The coefficient of variability was dependent on the size of the lentil, a two‐way interaction between sample size and compression and a three‐way interaction between location, cooking time and sample size. Regardless of lentil size, location where the lentil was grown and the cooking time used, the variability in the texture readings was lowest when the larger sample size and maximum compression force were used.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.176 · 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