Evaluation of Drying Behaviour of Cassava Chips under Open Sun and Oven Drying Technologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effect of drying temperatures and time on the drying rates, moisture content, and cyanide contents of five different species of cassava chips using two different drying technologies (oven and sun-drying).Fresh cassava tubers were chipped to uniform sizes of about 5×2×1 cm and dried using the two drying methods.The proximate analysis of the five different species was carried out both before and after drying.The final moisture contents of samples A-E are within the range of 12.05-14.81%for oven drying and 12.42-14.81%for sun drying, with sample D maintaining the highest moisture contents in both drying technologies.The results equally showed that the drying rates for samples A-E are within the range of 0.15-0.20 g/min for oven drying, and 0.022-0.025g/min for sun drying, with sample E maintaining the lowest drying rates in both drying technologies.Oven drying produced a higher drying rate than sun drying.However, the cyanide retention for samples A-E is within the range of 0.00930-0.05339mg/g for oven drying, with sample D maintaining the highest cyanide retention, while it is 0.00728-0.01589mg/g for sun drying, with sample E maintaining the lowest cyanide retention.The cyanide retention obtained in oven and sun drying could be compared favorably to the standard value, with slight discrepancies that could be attributed to the initial cyanide content of the species and the drying temperatures.The results also show that cyanide content elimination is more effective in sun-drying than oven-drying because the drying temperatures remained below 55℃, which is optimal for cyanogen degradation.On the effect of time, the results remained constant; hence, it was only a function of the drying temperatures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".