MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043276391 · doi:10.3390/foods9070957

Technological Properties of Acetylated Pigeon Pea Starch and Its Stabilized Set-Type Yoghurt

2020· article· en· W3043276391 on OpenAlexafffund
Aderonke Ibidunni Olagunju, Olufunmilayo Sade Omoba, Victor N. Enujiugha, Adeola M. Alashi, Rotimi E. Aluko

Bibliographic record

VenueFoods · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFederal University of Technology Akure
KeywordsSyneresisStarchStabilizer (aeronautics)Food scienceSwellingChemistryModified starchSolubilityWhey proteinPolysaccharideMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) as a stabilizer in set-type yoghurt. Acetylated starch possessed higher solubility and swelling power than native starch under the temperature regimes considered. Addition of acetylated pigeon pea starch as a stabilizer in yoghurt had positive influence on the water holding capacity (7.7% to 10.4% compared to 13.3% in yoghurt stabilized with native pigeon pea starch) and whey syneresis (approximately 15%, 12%, and 8% increase observed in yoghurt with acetylated pea starch compared to 47% in yoghurt with native pea starch stabilizer) at the end of a 28-day cold storage period. In addition, pea starch-stabilized yoghurt possessed an enhanced sensory attribute (firmness), and compared favourably with gelatin-stabilized yoghurt in terms of overall acceptability. Thus, acetylated pigeon pea starch exhibited improved physicochemical properties and showed usefulness as a stabilizer in yoghurt because it enhanced the physicochemical, storability, and sensorial quality, while improving the body and texture of the product.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFoodsSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207