MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477029291 · doi:10.1038/srep30273

Effect of high pressure treatment on the aging characteristics of Chinese liquor as evaluated by electronic nose and chemical analysis

2016· article· en· W2477029291 on OpenAlexaff
Saichang Zhu, Min Xu, Hosahalli S. Ramaswamy, Mei Yang, Ying Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFermentation and Sensory Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsElectronic noseChemistryHigh pressureAromaFlavorAlcohol contentFood scienceChromatographyAlcoholMaterials scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several high pressure (HP) treatments (100-400 MPa; 15 and 30 min) were applied to Chinese "Junchang" liquor, and aging characteristics of the liquor were evaluated. Results from the principal component analysis and the discriminant factor analysis of E-Nose demonstrated that HP treatment at 300 and 400 MPa resulted in significant (p < 0.05) changes in aroma components of the liquor. An increase in total ester content and a decrease in total acid content were observed for all treated samples (p < 0.05), which was verified by gas chromatography analysis. In addition, a slight decrease in alcohol content was found for HP treatment at 400 MPa for 30 min. These changes and trends were in accordance with the natural aging process of Chinese liquor. However, HP treatment caused a slight increase in solid content, which might be somewhat undesirable. Sensory evaluation results confirmed that favorable changes in color and flavor of Chinese liquor were induced by HP treatment; however, overall gaps still existed between the quality of treated and six-year aged samples. HP treatment demonstrated a potential to accelerate the natural aging process for Chinese liquor, but long term studies may be needed further to realize the full potential.

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 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 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicFermentation and Sensory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207