MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Amelioration of smoke taint in wine by treatment with commercial fining agents

2012· article· en· W2117847163 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Grape and Wine Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFermentation and Sensory Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilAlberta Water Research Institute
KeywordsWineSmokeChemistryWinemakingFood scienceFlavourOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Aims: Fermentation of smoke-affected grapes can lead to wines that exhibit objectionable smoke-related sensory attributes, i.e. smoke taint. Fining agents are routinely used at different stages of the winemaking process to address constituents that are considered to adversely affect juice or wine quality. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of commercial fining agents in reducing the concentration of volatile phenols and the intensity of sensory attributes associated with smoke-tainted wine. Methods and Results: Smoke-affected wines were treated with a range of fining agents, two of which, an activated carbon and a synthetic mineral, were found to appreciably ameliorate the taint. Treated wines contained a significantly lower level of smoke-derived volatile phenols and exhibited less intense ‘smoke’ and ‘cold ash’ aromas, ‘smoky’ flavour and ‘ashy’ aftertaste, compared with that of untreated (control) wines; with little or no impact on wine colour. Conclusions: Selected fining agents can ameliorate smoke taint in wine. Whereas most fining agents showed poor specificity towards the wine components responsible for smoke taint, some, an activated carbon in particular, were highly effective. Significance of the Study: This research identifies a treatment that can be used to mitigate the impact of grapevine exposure to smoke on wine composition and sensory properties.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.187 · 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