Making Edible Film from Jackfruit Seed Starch (Artocarpus Heterophyllus) with the Addition of Rosella Flower Extract (Hibiscus Sabdariffa L.) as Antioxidant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to determine the physical and chemical characteristics of the edible film of jackfruit seed starch (Artocarpus heterophyllus) added with antioxidant rosella flower extract (Hibiscus sabdariffa). The type of plasticizer used is glycerol. The best treatment in this study was the jackfruit seed edible film with the addition of rosella flower extract 3% (v/v) with the results obtained respectively for a thickness of 0.09 mm, tensile strength 0.003332 N/mm2, elongation percentage 126.36%, elasticity 0.002637 Kgf/mm2, pH 6.122, water absorption 61.67%, solubility 40%, water vapor transmission speed 0.6714 gram/hour m2, FTIR test results show that the process of making edible film in this research is the mixing process Physics, the shelf life of edible film at room temperature is 6 days and at cold temperatures is 8 days, and has antioxidant activity with an IC50 value 219.948 ppm. The addition of rosella flower extract enhances another benefit of edible film which functions as a food protector from the oxidation process (antioxidant).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".