Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Starch has been used over several millennia for a number of different applications. However, research on understanding this substance only spans about three centuries starting with Leeuwenhoek who observed it microscopically as discrete granules in 1716. This story of discovery of the molecular structure and architectural makeup of starch will be chronicled in a series of six essays of which this is the first with a focus on the molecular linkages in starch. The principally simple molecular constitution of starch is well known to everyone at this time. However, the researchers that contributed to this knowledge found the substance to be extraordinarily mysterious and the history of research on the molecular constitution of starch spans over several centuries. Starch had been used for thousands of years, which expanded in the early 19th century when it was discovered that it could be transformed into sugars by hydrolysis in dilute sulfuric acid. It took, however, still more than a century before the nature and the true molecular structure of the basic monomeric unit was established. Only after this, was it possible to clarify the nature of the glycosidic linkages in starch.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".