MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2366458636

Effect of ultrasonic modification on edible chitosan-soy protein isolated membrane

2014· article· en· W2366458636 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience and Technology of Food Industry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltrasonic sensorMaterials scienceComposite numberSonicationUltimate tensile strengthUltrasoundComposite materialElongationResponse surface methodologyChitosanSoy proteinAcousticsChemical engineeringChromatographyChemistryFood science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the film- formed process,ultrasonic modification was used to optimize the process.Response surface methodology was used to study the impact of ultrasonic power,ultrasonic time,and ultrasonic temperature on ultrasound modification.Composite score of the film was used as indicator,the optimum parameters that affect the final sonication factors were determined: ultrasonic power was 29 W,ultrasonic time was 24 min,ultrasonic temperature was 59℃.Under this condition,the maximum film composite score was 0.90,which was closed to the theoretical prediction 0.91. At the same time,the tensile strength of the composite film( TS) was 3652 N /m2,elongation at break was 28.73%.Compared with the unmodified film,the overall performance of the composite film after ultrasonic treatment was greatly improved.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.244 · 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