Applications of Pulsed Light Decontamination Technology in Food Processing: An Overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consumers of the 21st century tend to be more aware and demand safe as well as nutritionally balanced food. Unfortunately, conventional thermal processing makes food safe at the cost of hampering nutritional value. The food industry is trying to develop non-thermal processes for food preservation. Pulsed light (PL) is one such emerging non-thermal food processing method that can decontaminate food products or food contact surfaces using white light. Exposure to intense light pulses (in infrared, visible, and ultraviolet (UV) regions) causes the death of microbial cells, rendering the food safe at room temperature. PL technology is an excellent and rapid method of disinfection of product surfaces and is increasingly being used for food surfaces and packaging decontamination, enabling the minimal processing of food. This paper aims to give an overview of the latest trends in pulsed light research, discuss principles of pulse generation, and review applications of various PL systems for the inactivation of microorganisms in vitro, in various food products, and on food contact surfaces. Effects of PL on food quality, challenges of the process, and its prospects are presented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".