Drying of Albedo and Whole Peel of Yellow Passion Fruit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of waste has been the focus of attention of the agri-food sector, and a fruit with large amount of waste is the passion fruit. Its peel consists of albedo and flavedo, which can be used to manufacture flour, and some studies propose the need to remove the flavedo as well as to perform maceration. The objective of the present work was to study the drying process to produce flour from passion fruit albedo and whole peel, checking the influences of the flavedo removal and maceration steps, as well as the drying temperatures (70 and 80 ºC). Yield after drying was calculated and it was shown to be low. Page, Silva et alii, Henderson and Pabis and Logarithmic mathematical models were fitted to the experimental data using LAB Fit software. The statistical indicators used to identify the best fit were coefficient of determination (R2) and chi-square (χ2). The Page model was the one that fitted best to the data, showing the best statistical indicators. Also, it can also be highlighted that the sample composed of peel without maceration and dried at 70 ºC had the best results regarding the statistical indicators.
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".