MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096494346 · doi:10.1080/87559129.2020.1839492

Recent developments in key processing techniques for oriental spices/herbs and condiments: a review

2020· review· en· W3096494346 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Reviews International · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Quality and Safety Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraditional medicineDried fruitFood scienceFood processingFlavorBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oriental spices/herbs and condiments are important components of daily food consumption in the oriental countries as well as around the world. They have gained more atterention as preservatives, flavor, and therapeutic agents recently. However, the quality of spices/herbs and condiments is closely related to the processing techniques. Therefore, to obtain oriental spices/herbs and condiments with high-quality, processing techniques should be thoughly seleted. This article reviews the recent progresses in key processing techniques for oriental spices/herbs and condiments including, new drying methods, cryogenic grinding, novel fermentation and sterilization techniques. Moreover, the outlook of using oriental spices/herbs and condiments and their application in food products is also disscussed.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.230 · 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