MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117847550 · doi:10.1007/s11746-011-1971-0

The Isolation of Yellow Mustard Oil Using Water and Cyclic Ethers

2011· article· en· W2117847550 on OpenAlexafffund
Solmaz Tabtabaei, Levente L. Diósady

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Oil Chemists Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicEdible Oils Quality and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEmulsionAqueous two-phase systemExtraction (chemistry)TetrahydrofuranChemistryAqueous solutionChromatographySolventHexaneVegetable oilPetroleumOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An aqueous extraction process (AEP) was developed for dehulled yellow mustard flour with the aim of producing yellow mustard oil for industrial applications, as a by‐product of food protein production. During AEP, most of the oil extracted was bound in a stable oil‐in‐water emulsion that must be destabilized to recover free oil. The oil distribution after aqueous extraction and the composition of the emulsion produced were determined. The emulsion was solubilized in organic solvents including tetrahydrofuran (THF) and 1,4‐dioxane to fully recover the oil in a single‐phase oil–solvent‐water miscella. Over 97 and 95% of the oil in the emulsion was successfully recovered using 4:1 THF:oil and 9:1 dioxane:oil weight ratios, respectively. The oil recovery from the emulsion was optimized, based on experimentally prepared ternary phase diagrams of THF/oil/water and dioxane/oil/water. The results suggest that this technically viable approach can successfully recover essentially all of the oil from the emulsion, equivalent to an overall free oil recovery of ~63% from dehulled yellow mustard 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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Oil Chemists SocietySame topicEdible Oils Quality and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207