MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411657013 · doi:10.51847/ubedlqqbrs

10.51847/ubedlqqBrs

2000· article· en· W4411657013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEnzyme Production and Characterization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TabrizIslamic Azad University
KeywordsStearatePolyvinyl alcoholSpongeChemistryAgarOrganic chemistryBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to investigate the impact of guargum and propylene glycol mono-stearate (PGME) emulsifier on the physicochemical properties of sponge cake.Therefore, guar gum at levels of 0%, 0.3% and 0.5% and PGME emulsifier at 0% and 0.5% levels was added to the formulation.The treatments were examined in 3 replicates and the results obtained were analyzed by using one-way ANOVA and were compared using Duncan's multiple-range test at probability level (0.05>p).The results showed that the addition of guar and PGME led to increased cake specific volume.The results of the texture analysis of the samples indicated a lower hardness (firmness) in the sample containing gum agar (0.3%) and emulsifier (0%).The highest specific volume value of cake belonged to gum (0.5%) and emulsifier (0.5%).An increase in the level of gum agar and PGME emulsifier in the formulation of sponge cake resulted in an improvement in the amount of L component in the cake that can be attributed to the high water absorption capacity by gum and PGME emulsion.Based on the results, the highest sensory attributes score belonged to the sample containing 0.5% gum and 0.5% emulsifier.The addition of agar and PGME emulsifier improved water absorption, increased porosity and improved the texture in such a way that the measurement of texture properties of the cake by texture analyzer revealed that the addition of gum and emulsifiers will reduce the firmness of the cake over time.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9220.777

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.176 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicEnzyme Production and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207