MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384201998 · doi:10.1080/15583724.2023.2234464

Natural Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Agents and Processing Technologies for the Design of Active Food Packaging Polymers

2023· article· en· W4384201998 on OpenAlexaff
Boon Peng Chang, Binh M. Trinh, Debela T. Tadele, Nandika Bandara, Tizazu H. Mekonnen

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Reviews · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive packagingFood packagingSustainabilityBiochemical engineeringAntimicrobialShelf lifeCarbon footprintFood industryWaste managementMaterials scienceEngineeringFood scienceChemistryGreenhouse gasBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last decades, food packaging has advanced significantly, which is crucial in maintaining food safety and minimizing waste. However, most traditional food packaging materials in the market are typically made of inexpensive synthetic plastics with a limited scope of providing physical containment and an effective barrier against moisture and gases. In contrast, sustainable active packaging offers a promising solution to extend the shelf-life of food by effectively decreasing the rate of oxidative deterioration and microbial growth while reducing the environmental impact of petrochemical-derived plastics. As a result, there is a significant interest in developing sustainable and active food packaging materials with a low carbon footprint. Natural resource-derived antioxidant and antimicrobial agents are better alternatives to traditional synthetic agents when combined with any biodegradable polymer as it enhances the sustainability portfolio. This review critically evaluates recent trends in developing natural resource-derived antioxidant and antimicrobial agents for active food packaging applications. Various active biobased antioxidant and antimicrobial agents are critically reviewed and discussed, including their structure, physico-chemical properties, and various attributes in food packaging applications. Finally, this review presents an outlook on the future of sustainable and active food packaging materials and highlights the potential challenges in their development and implementation.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations42
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer ReviewsSame topicNanocomposite Films for Food PackagingFrench-language works237,207