Effect of Production Phase on Bottle-Fermented Sparkling Wine Quality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review analyzes bottle-fermented sparkling wine research at each stage of production by evaluating existing knowledge to identify areas that require future investigation. With the growing importance of enological investigation being focused on the needs of the wine production industry, this review examines current research at each stage of bottle-fermented sparkling wine production. Production phases analyzed in this review include pressing, juice adjustments, malolactic fermentation (MLF), stabilization, clarification, tirage, lees aging, disgorging, and dosage. The aim of this review is to identify enological factors that affect bottle-fermented sparkling wine quality, predominantly aroma, flavor, and foaming quality. Future research topics identified include regional specific varieties, plant-based products from vines, grapes, and yeast that can be used in sparkling wine production, gushing at disgorging, and methods to increase the rate of yeast autolysis. An internationally accepted sensory analysis method specifically designed for sparkling wine is required.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it