Flatbreads in Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and Uighur Groups and its Role in Sustainable Food System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Flatbreads are various types of comparably thin bread and are widespread in a large region. People embed flatbreads with special cultural meanings and adapted local ingredients for baking flatbreads. More attention has been focused on flatbreads in recent years. However, how the cross-border Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and Uighur groups use flatbreads is understudied. Methods To understand how the cross-border Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and Uighur groups use flatbreads, the current paper reviews existing English, Mandarin, and some Russian literature to summarize how the Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and Uighur groups use flatbreads. Results The results show that these three ethnic groups prepare and use flatbreads in multiple aspects. The Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and Uighur people use 23, 9, and 17 types of flatbreads respectively. The flatbreads used by the Kazakh and Kyrgyz people have more overlapping than those of the Uighur people while the relevant studies of Kyrgyz people are more understudied. This resemblance may be because of the closer nomadic lifestyle and the similar influences of Russia and the USSR. The ingredients of flatbreads are aligned with the local ecosystems and have been evolving consistently in the past centuries because of the changes in technology, politics, lifestyles, health perceptions, acculturation, and globalization. Conclusions Because of the eco-friendly features of flatbreads and the widespread use of these foods, flatbreads have a high potential to support a regional strategy for sustainable food system transformation and planetary health along the Silk Road countries. To achieve this goal, more studies should be conducted to contribute missing information about ingredients, cooking methods, features, and regional differences in using flatbreads; more nutritious and bio-diverse recipes of flatbreads and the most eco-friendly cooking energy resources for baking flatbread should be identified; new meanings should be given to flatbreads to promote the use. Key messages • The first study to summarize how Kazakh, Uighur, and Kyrgyz peoples use flatbread. • Justify a potential to use flatbread for sustainable food system transformation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".