MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386617654 · doi:10.5376/mmr.2023.13.0001

The Origin, Brewing and Development of Moutai Liquor

2023· article· en· W4386617654 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiayao Zhou, Shiying Yu, Z Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Microbiology Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrewingChinaHistory of ChinaBusinessHistoryFood scienceArchaeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The brewing history of Moutai is very long, and the ancient Pu people had a history of brewing. During the Qin and Han Dynasties, Maotai Town, which was still belong to Yelang Kingdom, had a variety of fruit-brewed wine, which was exported to various countries. Moutai, which is well known to us now, originated in the Tang and Song Dynasties with a history of more than 800 years. Moutai liquor belongs to Moutai-flavor liquor, which has long been the leader in Chinese liquor because of its clear and transparent liquor, soft and elegant aroma, mellow and long-lasting taste. Moutai's unique geographical environment, ancient and long brewing history and unique and scientific traditional brewing technology have created its unique microbial community, aroma and flavor components and product style, and its health care function of intervening and delaying liver fibrosis. The ancient and unique Moutai liquor not only inherits the essence of ancient brewing technology, but also shines with the brilliance of modern science and technology, which is a valuable national heritage of China. This review will deeply discuss the origin, brewing technology and historical development of Moutai, a famous liquor brand in China. By analyzing the historical origin, traditional brewing methods, quality assurance system and market performance of Moutai liquor, we try to reveal its unique position in China liquor market.

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 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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Microbiology ResearchSame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207