Relation between ultrasonic properties, rheology and baking quality for bread doughs of widely differing formulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective was to evaluate whether an ultrasonic reflectance technique has predictive capacity for breadmaking performance of doughs made under a wide range of formulation conditions. Two flours of contrasting dough strength augmented with different levels of ingredients (inulin, oil, emulsifier or salt) were used to produce different bread doughs with a wide range of properties. Breadmaking performance was evaluated by conventional large-strain rheological tests on the dough and by assessment of loaf quality. The ultrasound tests were performed with a broadband reflectance technique in the frequency range of 0.3-6 MHz. RESULTS: Principal component analysis showed that ultrasonic attenuation and phase velocity at frequencies between 0.3 and 3 MHz are good predictors for rheological and bread scoring characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonic parameters had predictive capacity for breadmaking performance for a wide range of dough formulations. Lower frequency attenuation coefficients correlated well with conventional quality indices of both the dough and the bread. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".