MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280600630 · doi:10.3390/polym14101987

Effect on the Properties of Edible Starch-Based Films by the Incorporation of Additives: A Review

2022· review· en· W4280600630 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

VenuePolymers · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxygen permeabilityFood packagingStarchMaterials scienceFiller (materials)Shelf lifeAntimicrobialActive packagingModified starchFood scienceComposite materialAntioxidantChemical engineeringOxygenChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, people more actively pursuing biodegradable-based food packaging to lower the environmental problems of plastic-based packaging. Starch could become a promising alternative to plastic because of its properties (easily available, nontoxic, tasteless, biodegradable, ecofriendly, and edible). This review article is focused mainly on the impact of the properties of starch-based biodegradable films, such as their thickness, morphology, and optical, water-barrier, mechanical, oxygen-barrier, antioxidant, and antimicrobial properties, after the incorporation of additives, and how such films fulfill the demands of the manufacturing of biodegradable and edible food-based film with preferable performance. The incorporation of additives in starch-based films is largely explained by its functioning as a filler, as shown via a reduction in water and oxygen permeability, increased thickness, and better mechanical properties. Additives also showed antimicrobial and antioxidant properties in the films/coatings, which would positively impact the shelf life of coated or wrapped food material.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.249 · 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