MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199388584 · doi:10.52326/jss.utm.2021.4(3).11

BEE HONEY: HISTORY, CHARACTERISTICS, PROPERTIES, BENEFITS AND ADULTERATION IN THE BEEKEEPING SECTOR

2021· article· en· W3199388584 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Aurica Chirsanova, Tatiana Capcanari, Alina Boiştean, Imen Khanchel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBee Products Chemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsBeekeepingPopulationHoney beeHoney BeesProduct (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)ToxicologyBiotechnologyAgricultural scienceGeographyBiologyFood scienceBusinessMathematicsEcologyEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review aims to share the history of bees and the use of honey as the only natural sweetener available to mankind for more than 40,000 years. At the same time, the characteristic of the beekeeping sector is presented, highlighting the top honey producers worldwide. The botanical origin of honey is the basis for the characterization of the 14 types of honey presented. Honey standards were analyzed to provide an overview of quality and physico-chemical indices. The data indicated in the national and regional honey standard are identical to the data for the international Codex Alimentarius standard. After the comparative analysis of these 3 sources, no significant deviations were identified. The tendencies of using honey from ancient times as a nutritious food product, as a preservative, as a medicine for treating various diseases and for performing certain rituals, etc. were highlighted. At the same time, the population must be encouraged to consume this incomparable bee 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 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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations39
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social SciencesSame topicBee Products Chemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207