Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of gluten-free corn-based biscuit supplemented with walnut and peanut for celiac patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research aimed to develop gluten-free biscuits from corn-based flour which was partially substituted with 5, 10, 15, or 20 % of either crushed, shell-less walnuts (WN), peanuts (PN), or their combination (1:1). Proximate analysis, physical and organoleptic properties of the biscuits developed were evaluated. Biscuit quality criteria were significantly improved by increasing the concentrations of WN, PN, or their combination. The content of fat, protein, crude fiber and ash increased as the levels of walnut, peanut, or their combination increased. The fat content of the gluten-free biscuits increased by 237.3, 148.1, and 188.9% when 20 % of the corn meal was replaced with WN, PN or their combination, respectively. Likewise, increases in protein were 129.1, 186.2 and 159.7 %, respectively. Furthermore, biscuit energy content was increased with all nut formulations, but increases were more obvious in those with WN, particularly at 15 and 20 %. A distinctly nutty flavor appeared in gluten-free biscuits supplemented with WN, PN, and their combination, and this desirable flavor was enhanced by increasing the nut content. Biscuits prepared from WN, PN, and a combination of both at 15 to 20 % were the most preferred formulation in terms of nutritional value and sensory criteria. Taking into account the cost of WN and PN, biscuits prepared with corn flour substituted with 15% nuts are recommended for celiac patients.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".