MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390605536 · doi:10.1002/9781119982098.ch9

Advances in Freeze Drying to Improve Efficiency and Maintain Quality of Dehydrated Fruit and Vegetable Products

2024· other· en· W4390605536 on OpenAlexaff
Swati Sharma, Kalyan Barman, Hare Krishna, Surya N. S. Chaurasia, Arun S. Mujumdar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Drying and Modeling
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Freeze-dryingDried fruitFresh foodEnvironmental scienceAgricultural engineeringPulp and paper industryProduct (mathematics)Water contentMoistureProcess engineeringFood scienceEngineeringMathematicsChemistryShelf life

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High moisture content and soft texture are the major factors that result in higher losses to the tune of even 25–40% in fresh fruit and vegetables, in turn causing colossal waste of food, time, efforts, input costs, and pre-harvest resources. Drying technology has been used as a valuable technology to reduce volume, preserve quality, and enhance storability far beyond what is possible for fresh horticultural commodities since ages. With advancement in time, different drying technologies have come up. Notable among them are freeze drying, which is known to produce the best-quality dried produce, and air drying, which is used most commonly due to ease of handling and cost efficacy. However, the major drawbacks of freeze drying are the long drying time and the higher energy consumption, which lead to a higher per-unit cost of the dried product. The current times demand an intelligent, cost-effective drying system with a quality of dried produce comparable to its fresh counterpart. This brings us to the need for advancement in freeze-drying systems to lower energy consumption and improve efficiency.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFood Drying and ModelingFrench-language works237,207