MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474503288 · doi:10.1111/jtxs.12208

Textural and Sensory Attributes of Steamed Bread Fortified with High‐Amylose Maize Starch

2016· article· en· W2474503288 on OpenAlexaff
Sunan Wang, Pasongsin Khamchanxana, Fan Zhu, Cheng Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Texture Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsNiagara College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood scienceSteamingShelf lifeResistant starchSteamed breadChemistryStarchOrganolepticAmylose

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Chinese steamed bread (CSB) is a staple food item produced through steaming fermented dough. High‐amylose maize starch (HAMS) is a natural source of resistant starch and dietary fiber. The feasibility of using HAMS with 80% amylose content to formulate northern style CSB was reported. Adding HAMS (up to 10%) had minimal influences on the color and texture of CSB. Specific volume and spread ratio of CSB were reduced by 10 − 20% and 10 − 13%, respectively. Increasing HAMS concentration from 2 to 10% decreased the staling rate of CSB by 8 − 48%. CSB with and without HAMS had a 3‐day mould‐free shelf‐life. Sensory evaluation showed that the overall acceptability of CSB containing HAMS (up to 6%) were comparable with control. Organoleptic, textural, and shelf life properties of CSB with 2% HAMS substitution were similar to the control. Practical Applications Adding HAMS could improve the shelf life of CSB without negatively affecting the sensory acceptability. The results of this study suggest the possibility of expanding the HAMS application and CSB in functional food market. The findings provide some insights for industrial research and development using resistant starch for healthy steamed cereal products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Texture StudiesSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207