Acceptability and Shelf-life Testing of Newly Formulated Crab Balls from Blue Swimming Crab (Portunus pelagicus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Meatballs made from fishery products such as fish, shrimp, and squid are among the popular street foods in Asia. To meet the increasing demand for these street foods, there is a need to develop/formulate new balls out of fishery products. Hence, in this study, crab balls from blue swimming crabs (Portunus pelagicus) were formulated and standardized using three formulations (meat and binder ratio): Formulation A (50:50), Formulation B (60:40), and Formulation C (70:30). Sensory attributes such as flavor, color, texture (juiciness and chewiness), and general acceptability of the three formulations were evaluated by sensory panelists. Selected formulation was further analyzed in terms of shelf-life testing and comparison with the existing commercial squid ball. Consumer testing was also done to determine the feasibility of the formulated crab ball. Results revealed that Formulations B and C received the highest overall score of sensory attributes (p
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".