MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951573455 · doi:10.1111/jtxs.12460

Effect of glycerol on the physicochemical properties of films based on legume protein concentrates: A comparative study

2019· article· en· W2951573455 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin J. Hopkins, Andrea K. Stone, Jiapei Wang, Darren R. Korber, Michael T. Nickerson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Texture Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMinistry of Agriculture - SaskatchewanJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsGlycerolLegumeFood scienceMaterials scienceChemistryChemical engineeringBotanyOrganic chemistryEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The overall goal of this research was to examine the mechanical, water vapor barrier properties and opacity of films prepared using legume protein concentrates (faba bean, pea, lupin, lentil, and soy) as a function of glycerol concentration (50, 75, or 100% [wt/wt]-relative to the protein weight). Overall, tensile strength (TS) decreased with increasing glycerol concentration, whereas tensile elongation (TE) and water vapor permeability (WVP) increased with increasing glycerol concentration. Film opacity was independent of glycerol concentration. The effect of protein-type varied considerably depending on the functional property of the film being measured; TS was greatest with faba bean and lowest with lupin, whereas TE was highest for pea, and lowest for soy. Lentil protein films had considerably higher WVP, at the 100% glycerol concentration, as compared to the other protein concentrates. Findings from this study indicate that legume protein concentrates are capable of forming biodegradable, edible films. Overall, pea protein concentrate films showed the most promise for application in terms of strength, elongation, and moisture barrier properties.

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 score0.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations41
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Texture StudiesSame topicNanocomposite Films for Food PackagingFrench-language works237,207