Plant-proteins based 3D meat analog printing: A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review summarizes and critically analyze the scientific studies pertinent to three-dimensional printing of plant-proteins based meat-analog. Vegetable proteins, oils, and water are the major ingredients in formulating ink for three-dimensional printing of meat-analogs; while, hydrocolloid, enzyme, yeast, colorant, mineral, flavor, etc. are used as minor ingredients. Both ingredients and formulation modulate rheological properties of the ink, and consequently three-dimensional printing's performance and post-printing stability of the meat-analogs. Printing temperature, contact angle, nozzle height, nozzle diameter, layer height, and speed of nozzle movement are the most critical parameters that influence printing of meat-analogs. Air heating, baking, steaming, deep-fat frying, and microwave heating have been successfully used to finish-cook three-dimensional printed meat-analogs. Micro-structural characteristics and ingredient's distribution impact functionalities and stability of printed analogs. Safety aspects, legal frameworks, and sustainability issues should be taken as major concern. Future research directions pertinent to three-dimensional printing of plant-based meat-analog, have been identified.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".