MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estudio comparativo de tres bebidas formuladas con jícama (Smallanthus sonchifolius)

2020· article· es· W3046097868 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueConcienciaDigital · 2020
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldNursing
TopicMicrobial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryBrixFood scienceSugar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Se formularon tres bebidas combinando jícama con piña, babaco y maracuyá con el objeto de proporcionar un valor agregado al uso tradicional de la jícama y posteriormente evaluar la calidad nutritiva de las mismas, para esto se realizaron los análisis físico químicos y microbiológicos determinándose pH, °Brix, acidez titulable, proteína, azucares totales, coliformes totales, aerobios mesófilos. Se utilizó un DCA y se aplicó la prueba estadística de Tukey con un niel de significancia p≤0,05 , encontrándose que las propiedades nutricionales del jugo de jícama con maracuyá presentaron mejores resultados por su valor nutritivo 11,50 °Brix, 3,82 pH, 13,19% acidez total, 0,54 % de proteína, 0,78 % cenizas y 38,62 % azucares totales Las tres formulaciones presentaron bajas cargas microbiológicas para mesófilos y coliformes que no superan los límites máximos permitidos por las normas INEN NTE 2337 para Jugos, pulpas, concentrados, néctares, bebidas de frutas y vegetales.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.247 · 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