MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Shortenings: Science and Technology

2020· other· en· W4232017512 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBailey's Industrial Oil and Fat Products · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Chemistry and Fat Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteresterified fatFood sciencePalatabilityFlavorRaw materialIngredientAromaChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Shortening is a commercially prepared edible fat used in frying, cooking, baking, and as an ingredient in fillings, icings, and confectionary items. It may have been named so because when dough is mixed, the water‐insoluble fat prevents cohesion of gluten strands, literally shortening them and thus generating tender baked goods. Shortening is typically a 100% fat product formulated with animal and/or vegetable oil. These oils have been processed for functionality (describes how well a product performs in a certain application) and to remove any undesirable flavor and aroma. Overall, shortening improves the texture and palatability of food products. Products with characteristics similar to shortening are discussed in this article, but only when similarities in raw material, usage, production methods, and equipment are similar to those of shortenings. Formulations include concerns about crystalline nature of the fats, fatty acid distribution, fractionation, hydrogenation, and interesterification. Manufacturing and processing equipment are detailed. The many forms of shortenings, i.e. solid, liquid, high stability, all purpose, pourable, and special formulations, are discussed. Packaging and storage of the final products are also presented.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.177 · 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