MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2178962433 · doi:10.5539/jfr.v4n6p69

The Production of Red Wine from Black Jasmine Rice

2015· article· en· W2178962433 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wachira Singkong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWineBlack riceFermentationFood scienceStarchBlack teaBrixChemistryHorticultureYeastBiologyRaw materialSugarBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research was conducted by employing local black jasmine rice grown in Kampaengphet, Thailand as raw material for red wine production. The author firstly studied black jasmine rice fundamental information, black jasmine starch and liquid starch. The 2 levels suitable proportions of black jasmine starch and clean water screened from 6 levels were 1:3 and 1:5 (w/w) prior to TSS adjustment to 20 and 25 oBrix. The mixture was 10 days fermented with Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast before conducting aging at 0-4 oC for 8 weeks. It was found the alcohol content of red wine produced from black jasmine rice was 12% after 10 days of fermentation and TSS was depleted to 7.5-9.25 oBrix as pH which insignificantly reduced from 3.17-3.12 to 3.46-3.62. Antioxidant activity comparison between before and after fermentation of black jasmine wine indicated 85.14-89.06% and reduced to 80.26-86.54% respectively, due to the fermentation and aging process which reduced average 27-41% of anthocyanin even though total phenolic was average 10-54% increased. Proportion between black jasmine rice starch and clean water contained different TSS has significantly effected to wine’s sense quality at 95% of confidence level. Black jasmine rice wine produced from the black jasmine rice to clean water proportion of 1:5 with 25 oBrix TSS adjusted has obtained highest total hedonic score in the issues of color, clarity, sweetness, bitterness and significantly differed (P<0.05). All characteristics derived score were greater than 7 (moderate satisfied) except body characteristic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ResearchSame topicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207