Effects of Pine Nut Oil Extracted by Different Methods and Microwave Heating on Quality of Oil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lipids oxidation is a major cause of quality deterioration in foods. To monitor the pine nuts oil extracted by different methods during microwave heating,physico-chemical properties and fatty acid composition of pine nut oil extracted by the aqueous enzymatic and the solvent methods were analyzed. Results showed that the two methods of extraction of pine nut oil quality were different. The aqueous enzymatic pine nuts acid value and phospholipid content were lower than those of solvent pine nut oil,while the peroxide value was higher than those of solvent pine nut oil. Extraction methods on the pine nut oil fatty acid composition was not significant,and effects of microwave heating on the quality of pine nut oil had not been reported. We also studied the effect of certain power( 700W),heating time( 1,3,5 and 7 min) on pine nut oil of the two methods quality to evaluate the security of the pine nut oil by microwave heating. Microwave heating induced severe quality and composition losses,mainly above 3 min of microwave heating,regardless the sample tested,so long time heating should be avoided in the microwave heating process of pine nut oil.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".