MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396731712 · doi:10.1021/acs.biomac.3c01438

Utilizing Synchrotron-Based X-ray Micro-Computed Tomography to Visualize the Microscopic Structure of Starch Hydrogels <i>In Situ</i>

2024· article· en· W4396731712 on OpenAlexafffund
Yikai Ren, Jarvis Stobbs, Dong‐Jin Lee, Dongxing Li, Chithra Karunakaran, Yongfeng Ai

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomacromolecules · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)University of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSelf-healing hydrogelsAmyloseStarchShrinkageSynchrotronMaterials scienceMicrostructureBiopolymerDispersitySwellingScanning electron microscopeChemical engineeringSmall-angle X-ray scatteringChemistryComposite materialPolymer chemistryPolymerScatteringFood scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to visualize the microstructures of starch hydrogels using synchrotron-based X-ray micro-computed tomography (μCT). Waxy maize starch (WMS, 3.3% amylose, db), pea starch (PS, 40.3% amylose), and high-amylose maize starch (HMS, 63.6% amylose) were cooked at 95 and 140 °C to prepare starch hydrogels. WMS and HMS failed to form a gel after 95 °C cooking and storage, while PS developed a firm gel. At 140 °C cooking, HMS of a high amylose nature was fully gelatinized and generated a rigid gel with the highest strength. Both scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and μCT revealed the unique structural features of various starch hydrogels/pastes prepared at different temperatures, which were greatly affected by the degree of swelling and dispersity of the starches. As a nondestructive method, μCT showed certain advantages over SEM, including minimal shrinkage of the hydrogels, relatively simple sample preparation, and allowing for three-dimensional reconstruction of the hydrogel microstructure. This study indicated that synchrotron-based μCT could be a useful technique in visualizing biopolymer-based hydrogels.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomacromoleculesSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207