Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare and analyze the acceptability and consumption attitude for soy foods between Korean and Canadian university students as young consumers. This survey was carried out by questionnaire and the subjects were n=516 in Korea and n=502 in Canada. Opinions for soy foods in terms of general knowledge were that soy foods are healthy (86.5％ in Korean and 53.4％ in Canadian) or neutral (11.6％ in Korean and 42.8％ in Canadian), dairy foods can be substituted by soy foods (51.9％ in Korean and 41.8％ in Canadian), and soy foods are not only for vegetarians and milk allergy patients but also for ordinary people (94.2％ in Korean and 87.6％ in Canadian). In main sources of information about soy foods, the rate by commercials on TV, radio or magazine was the highest (58.0) for Korean students and the rate by family or friend was the highest (35.7％) for Canadian students. In consumption attitude, all of Korean students have purchased soy foods but only 55.4％ of Canadian students have purchased soy foods, and soymilk was remarkably recognized and consumed then soy beverage and margarine in order. 76.4％ of Korean students and 65.1％ of Canadian students think soy foods are general and popular and can purchase easily, otherwise, in terms of price, soy foods were expensively recognized as 'more expensive than dairy foods' was 59.1％ (Korean) and 54.7％ (Canadian), and 'similar to dairy foods' was 36.8％ (Korean) and 39.9％ (Canadian). Major reasons for the rare consumption were 'I am not interested in soy foods' in Korean students (27.3％) and 'I prefer dairy foods to soy foods' in Canadian students (51.7％). However, consumption of soy foods in both countries are very positive and it will be increased.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".