Applications of Plant Polymer-Based Solid Foams: Current Trends in the Food Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foams are a type of material of great importance, having an extensive range of applications due to a combination of several characteristics, such as ultra-low density, tunable porous architecture, and outstanding mechanical properties. The production of polymer foams worldwide is dominated by those based on synthetic polymers, which might be biodegradable or non-biodegradable. The latter is a great environmental concern and has become a major waste management problem. Foams derived from renewable resources have aroused the interest of researchers, solid foams made from plant polymers in particular. This review focuses on the development of plant polymer-based solid foams and their applications in the food industry over the last fifteen years, highlighting the relationship between their material and structural properties. The applications of these foams fall mainly into two categories: edible foams and packaging materials. Most plant polymers utilized for edible applications are protein-based, while starch and cellulose are commonly used to produce food packaging materials because of their ready availability and low cost. However, plant polymer-based solid foams exhibit some drawbacks related to their high water absorbency and poor mechanical properties. Most research has concentrated on improving these two physical properties, though few studies give a solid understanding and comprehension of the micro- to macrostructural modifications that would allow for the proper handling and design of foaming processes. There are, therefore, several challenges to be faced, the control of solid foam structural properties being the main one.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".