MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035133227 · doi:10.4236/fns.2020.116034

Nutritional Value of Date Fruits and Potential Use in Nutritional Bars for Athletes

2020· article· en· W3035133227 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sulaiman O. Aljaloud, Heather Colleran, Salam A. Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueFood and Nutrition Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDate Palm Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Population and Public HealthNational Institute of Food and AgricultureKing Saud University
KeywordsRiboflavinContext (archaeology)Pantothenic acidVitaminNutrientPhoenix dactyliferaNiacinThiamineBiologyFood sciencePalmEcologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The date palm (Phoenix dactylifera L.) is one of the oldest primary staple crops in Southwest Asia and North Africa. Date palms are also grown in Australia, Mexico, South America, Southern Africa, and the United States, especially in Southern California, Arizona, and Texas. Date fruit is a high nutritional value food that is rich in carbohydrates, dietary fibers, proteins, minerals and vitamin B complex such as thiamine (B1), riboflavin (B2), niacin (B3), pantothenic (B5), pyridoxine (B6), and folate (B9). Carbohydrates comprise 70% of date fruit mainly as fructose and glucose. Minerals in date fruits are calcium, iron, magnesium, selenium, copper, phosphorus, potassium, zinc, sulfur, cobalt, fluorine, and manganese. Date fruits are highly nourishing and may thus confer numerous potential health benefits. In recent years, a huge interest in the abundant health promoting properties of date fruits has led to the need to develop new food products using dates as a source of nutrients. Thus, the aim of this paper is to review the nutritional value of date fruits in the context of the potential use of dates in nutrition bars for athletes.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations87
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood and Nutrition SciencesSame topicDate Palm Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207