MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390993635 · doi:10.51984/jopas.v22i3.2757

Analysis of Potassium Bromate Contents of Commonly Consumed Loaves of Bread Samples in Tokra-Libya

2023· article· en· W4390993635 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Salwa Rahil, Intisar El Sharaa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pure & Applied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicDye analysis and toxicity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBromatePotassium bromateFood scienceEuropean unionChemistryOxidizing agentPotassiumToxicologyMathematicsBusinessBiologyBromideChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bread is one of the most popular foods consumed worldwide. It is a very popular foodstuff consumed in almost every house in Libya as well as in Tokra city as breakfast. Potassium bromate is an oxidizing agent that has been used as bread additive added to preserve the flavour and teste of the bread but continuing to consume it endangers health as a result of its carcinogenic effect, as it remains in the loaf of bread without disintegration, For this reason, Potassium bromate is banned in several countries, including Brazil, Canada, the European Union and the United Kingdom and the FDA has since 1991 merely encouraged bakers to voluntarily stop using it, with somewhat limited success. In this study, levels of residual bromate were determined in 21commercial breads and traditional loaf types from 7 automated bakeries, except for one, a manual bakery randomly were collected from different local bakeries in Tokra city and its environs (Libya), in Feb. 2023. The tested samples of bread were analyzed using two mothed (qualitative and quantitative analyses) a spectrophotometric method of bromate analysis. Bromate concentrations ranged from 0.07-0.29 μgg-1, with an overall mean concentration of 0.14±0.07 μgg-1(ppm). Significant differences were noticed.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.292
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 designObservational
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 venueJournal of Pure & Applied SciencesSame topicDye analysis and toxicityFrench-language works237,207