MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382560685 · doi:10.3390/foods12132516

Nutritional Composition of Hass Avocado Pulp

2023· review· en· W4382560685 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFoods · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerseaNutrientPulp (tooth)Health benefitsBiologyComposition (language)HorticultureBotanyFood scienceTraditional medicineMedicineEcologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) are a unique fruit that can provide health benefits when included in a healthy diet. As health care moves towards precision health and targeted therapies or preventative medicine, it is critical to understand foods and their dietary components. The nutritional composition and plant physiology of the Hass avocado is strikingly different from other fruits. This paper reviews the nutrient and bioactive composition of the edible portion of the Hass avocado (pulp) reported in the literature and from commercial lab analyses of the current market supply of fresh Hass avocados. These results provide comprehensive data on what nutrients and bioactives are in avocado and the quantity of these nutrients. We discuss the reasons for nutrient composition variations and review some potential health benefits of bioactive compounds found in Hass avocados.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.157
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.173 · 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