Major Carbohydrate, Polyol, and Oligosaccharide Profiles of Agave Syrup. Application of this Data to Authenticity Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nineteen pure agave syrups representing the three major production regions and four processing facilities in Mexico were analyzed for their major carbohydrate, polyol, and oligosaccharide profiles, as well as their physicochemical properties (pH, °Brix, total acidity, percent total titratable acidity, and color). Additionally, the detection of intentional debasing of agave syrup with four commercial nutritive sweeteners (HFCS 55 and 90, DE 42 and sucrose) was afforded by oligosaccharide profiling employing both high performance anion exchange liquid chromatography with pulsed amperometric detection (HPAE-PAD) and capillary gas chromatography with flame ionization detection (CGC-FID). Results showed that the major carbohydrate and polyol in agave syrups were fructose and inositol with mean concentrations of 84.29% and 0.38%, respectively. Oligosaccharide profiling was extremely successful for adulteration detection with detection limits ranging from 0.5 to 2.0% for the aforementioned debasing agents. Also, all four of these possible adulterants could be detected within a single chromatographic analysis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".