MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The diversity of effects of yeast derivatives during sparkling wine aging

2022· article· en· W4229456291 on OpenAlexfundno aff
María Ignacia Lambert-Royo, Cristina Úbeda, Rubén del Barrio‐Galán, Nathalie Sieczkowski, Joan Miquel Canals, Álvaro Peña‐Neira, Mariona Gil

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFermentation and Sensory Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLallemandUniversidad de Sevilla
KeywordsTorulaspora delbrueckiiYeastLeesFood scienceWineSaccharomyces cerevisiaeChemistrySaccharomycesBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study shows the monitoring of the physical, chemical and sensorial changes that occur in the sparkling wine along 18 months of aging due to different typology yeast-derived products; dry inactivated yeast from Saccharomyces (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and non-Saccharomyces (Torulaspora delbrueckii) yeast strains, yeast autolysate, and yeast protein extract tested at two different doses. The addition of 5 g/hL yeast protein extract and inactivated yeast from T. delbrueckii helped to preserve esters in wines with 9 and 18 months of aging on lees. The addition of yeast autolysate achieved greater polysaccharide enrichment and gave rise to sparkling wines with the highest antioxidant activity. Effects on foaming properties were quite different depending on the aging time. Despite this, sparkling wines treated with 10 g/hL of yeast autolysate and Optimum White™ generally exhibited the highest foamability and foam stability. Further experiments with higher doses are needed to observe clear effects on sensory profile.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood ChemistrySame topicFermentation and Sensory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207