MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090343168 · doi:10.3390/pr8101227

Classification, Force Deformation Characteristics and Cooking Kinetics of Common Beans

2020· article· en· W3090343168 on OpenAlexaff
Ebenezer Miezah Kwofie, I. Ogan, Michael Ngadi

Bibliographic record

VenueProcesses · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersInternational Fund for Agricultural Development
KeywordsSofteningCultivarMathematicsFood scienceChemistryHorticultureMaterials scienceStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-harvest characteristics of common beans influences its classification, which significantly affects processing time and energy requirements. In this work, ten bean cultivars were classified as either easy-to-cook (ETC) or hard-to-cook (HTC) based on a traditional subjective finger pressing test and a scientific objective hardness test. The hardness study used seed coat rigidity to explain the structural deformation observed during cooking. The result shows that the average hardness of raw dry ETC and HTC beans was 102.4 and 170.8 N, respectively. The maximum seed coat resistance is observed within the first 30 min of cooking regardless of the classification. The results show that a modified three-parameter non-linear regression model could accurately predict the rate of bean softening (R2 = 0.994–0.999 and RMSE = 3.3–14.7%). The influence of bean softeners such as potassium carbonate (K2CO3) and sodium chloride (NaCl) to reduce cooking time was also investigated. The results showed that the addition of K2CO3 to the cooking water significantly reduced the cooking time by up to 50% for ETC and 57% for HTC.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcessesSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207