Microbial investigation of cleanability of different plastic and metal surfaces used by the food industry
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different conveyor belt materials used by the meat and other food industries were compared, regarding their cleanability as bacterial reduction rates in relation to their surface topography. Eleven thermoplastic polymers, four stainless steels, and five aluminized nanostructured surfaces were investigated under laboratory conditions. Cleanings were conducted with water only, and with an alkaline foam detergent. Overall, scanning electron microscopy revealed remarkable differences in the surface topography of the tested surfaces. Water cleaning results showed that nanostructured aluminized surfaces achieved significantly higher cleanability rates compared to the eight thermoplastic surfaces, as well as the glass-bead blasted rough stainless steel. Thermoplastic surfaces showed overall low cleanability rates when cleaned with alkaline detergent, while stainless steel and nanoporous aluminum showed high variations. Overall, nanoporous aluminum showed promising results as it can be used to coat conveyor belts. However, compatibility with cleaning detergent and sensitivity to scratches must be further investigated. Overall, it can be concluded that cleanability is not only influenced by surface roughness, but also by the overall surface finish, scratches, and defects. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13197-023-05778-0.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it