MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408561419 · doi:10.1080/03610470.2025.2475277

Impact of Bourbon Continuous Column Operations on Ethyl Carbamate Levels

2025· article· en· W4408561419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brad J. Berron, J.F. Brown, Jason Gambrell, Mary McIntosh, Sarah Wilson, Jarrad Gollihue, Harmonie M. Bettenhausen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Brewing Chemists · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthyl carbamateCarbamateChromatographyColumn (typography)ChemistryEthyl esterMathematicsOrganic chemistryFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

European and Canadian regulators enforce strict limits on the ethyl carbamate content of alcoholic beverages. North American distillers’ malt have high glycosidic nitrile levels which amplify the ethyl carbamate level of whiskey. Guidelines are required to produce low ethyl carbamate whiskey from North American distillers’ malts. This work challenges several strategies for reducing ethyl carbamate levels in bourbon and American whiskey products. New make spirit was produced using a bourbon mash bill on a continuous beer still with doubler. The low wines alcohol content and beer feed tray were systematically varied while the caustic cleaning schedules were monitored to generate 113 unique high wines distillate samples. Ethyl carbamate levels in each sample were determined by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Ethyl carbamate levels are reduced by feeding beer into a lower tray on the distillation column. Ethyl carbamate levels are reduced in distillates collected shortly after caustic cleaning over those collected longer after a caustic cleaning. There was no significant effect (p > 0.05) on ethyl carbamate levels as the low wines alcohol content was changed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Brewing ChemistsSame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207