Comparative kinetic analysis of convective and vacuum dried Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill. cladodes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Opuntia ficus-indica (Linnaeus) Miller more usually known as fodder palm or nopal belongs to family Cactaceae. In the present study, the drying behavior of the O. ficus-indica cladodes was observed. The study concentrates on comparatively studying two types of commercial drying methods viz., forced convective drying (tray drying) and vacuum drying to dry nopal cladodes at three different temperatures viz. 40, 50 and 60°C. The equilibrium moisture contents for forced convective drying was achieved at 540-720 min and for that of vacuum drying at 600-840 min. Three mathematical drying models for thin layer drying viz. Page, Lewis and Henderson-Pabis model were evaluated for both convective drying and vacuum drying. Statistical parameters such as the coefficient of determination (R2), root mean square error and reduced χ2 were used to fit the models. Page model was found to be satisfactory for both forced convective and vacuum drying of the nopal cladodes at 40 and 50°C respectively. Among these, two drying methods, forced convective drying method was found to be more suitable than the vacuum drying method for nopal cladodes on the basis of drying time and statistical parameters.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 it