Progress in Extrusion-Based Food Printing Technology for Enhanced Printability and Printing Efficiency of Typical Personalized Foods: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional printing technology enables the personalization and on-demand production of edible products of individual specifications. Four-dimensional printing technology expands the application scope of 3D printing technology, which controllably changes the quality attributes of 3D printing products over time. The concept of 5D/6D printing technology is also gradually developing in the food field. However, the functional value of food printing technology remains largely unrealized on a commercial scale due to limitations of printability and printing efficiency. This review focuses on recent developments in breaking through these barriers. The key factors and improvement methods ranging from ink properties and printer design required for successful printing of personalized foods (including easy-to-swallow foods, specially shaped foods, and foods with controlled release of functional ingredients) are identified and discussed. Novel evaluation methods for printability and printing precision are outlined. Furthermore, the design of printing equipment to increase printing efficiency is discussed along with some suggestions for cost-effective commercial printing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".