THERMODYNAMIC PROPERTIES OF THE WATER ADSORPTION PROCESS IN BARU FLOURS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Baru almonds and their byproducts have gained popularity in the population diet because of their high nutritional values. Despite this, there is limited information on how to store their flours properly, particularly their whole and partially defatted flours. Thus, this study aimed to use the Guggenheim–Anderson–de Boer (GAB) model to determine the thermodynamic properties of enthalpy, entropy, and Gibbs’s free energy variation, as well as the spreading pressure, all of which are inherent to the moisture adsorption process in baru flours. The oil content, ash content, moisture content, pH, and wettability of the baru flour samples were characterized. The adsorption isotherms were determined using the static gravimetric method at temperatures of 298.15, 303.15, and 308.15 K and adjusted to the GAB model. The differential enthalpy variation was positive and decreased as the moisture content in the flours increased, whereas the differential entropy variation exhibited an opposite trend. The isokinetic theory was validated, as the process was driven by entropy. The spreading pressure increased as water activity increased.
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".