MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pengaruh Penambahan Lactobacillus fermentum CK165 dan Lama Fermentasi terhadap Karakteristik Fisik Kopi Arabika (Coffea arabica) Asal Kintamani, Bangli

2022· article· en· W4318212687 on OpenAlexaff
Sayi Hatiningsih, I Dewa Gde Mayun Permana, Bambang Admadi Harsojuwono, Ida Bagus Wayan Gunam, Noval Wahyu Adi

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Ilmu dan Teknologi Pangan (ITEPA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsKintama (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactobacillus fermentumFermentationCoffea arabicaFood scienceArabica coffeeGreen coffeeCompletely randomized designCoffee beanHorticultureLactic acidBiologyLactobacillus plantarumBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fermentation stage is considered to be one of the critical steps in coffee processing due to its impact on the final quality of the product. The aim of this study was to determined the effect of Lactobacillus fermentum CK165 addition and fermentation time on the physical characteristics of Arabica coffee Kintamani, Bangli, and knowing the right treatment to produce Arabica coffee with the best physical characteristics. This study used a completely randomized design (CRD) with treatment using Lactobacillus fermentum CK165 addition and duration of fermentation consisting of 0 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, and 36 hours. Each treatment was repeated 2 times to obtain 16 experimental units. The physical characteristics of Arabica coffee were analyzed statistically by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and continued with Duncan multiple range test (DMRT), if there was an affect between treatments. The result showed that Lactobacillus fermentum CK165 addition and fermentation time significantly affected the bulk density, moisture content, bean number/10 g, weight of 100 beans, bean wide, and color (L* and b*). Lactobacillus fermentum CK165 addition and fermentation for 24 hours resulted Arabica coffee with the best physical characteristics with bulk density 0.637 g/ml, moisture content 8.507%, bean number/10 g 51.500 beans, weight of 100 beans 19.873 g, long 10.570 mm, wide 7.401 mm, thick 4.305 mm, L* 36.588, a* 1,670, b* 11.045, broken beans 0.533 bean number/100 g, brown beans 0.102 bean number/100 g, and partly black beans 1.766 bean number/100 g.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Ilmu dan Teknologi Pangan (ITEPA)Same topicEducational Methods and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207