MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118235106 · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2020.566445

Water-in-Oleogel Emulsions—From Structure Design to Functionality

2021· article· en· W3118235106 on OpenAlexafffund
Khakhanang Wijarnprecha, Auke de Vries, Sopark Sonwai, Dérick Rousseau

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Chemistry and Fat Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRheologyEmulsionChemical engineeringMaterials scienceDispersion (optics)Phase (matter)Aqueous solutionAqueous two-phase systemAdsorptionFiller (materials)NanotechnologyChemistryComposite materialOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of water-in-oleogel (W/Og) emulsions is highlighted, with focus placed on the key properties dictating the structuring ability of both the continuous oleogelled and dispersed phases present. The gelling ability of oleogelators is distinguished by the formation of crystalline structures, polymeric strands, or tubules. Once a dispersed aqueous phase is introduced, droplet stabilization may occur via oleogelator adsorption onto the surface of the dispersed droplets, the formation of a continuous gel network, or a combination of both. Surface-active species (added or endogenous) are also required for effective W/Og aqueous phase dispersion and stabilization. Processing conditions, namely temperature-time-shear regimes, are also discussed given their important role on dispersed droplet and oleogel network formation. The effects of many factors on W/Og emulsion formation, rheology, and stability remain virtually unknown, particularly the role of dispersed droplet size, gelation, and clustering as well as the applicability of the active filler concept to foods. This review explores some of these factors and briefly mentions possible applications of W/Og emulsions.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Sustainable Food SystemsSame topicFood Chemistry and Fat AnalysisFrench-language works237,207