Production and Characterization of Fruit Bars Produced from the Mucilaginous Pulp of Garcinia kola
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fruit bars were produced from exotic Garcinia kola fruit pulp puree at different concentrations. The bars were sweetened using 'date fruit paste', aspartame and sucrose. Hydrocolloids such as guar gum, xanthan gum and gelatin were added for stabilization. Analysis of the sensory results showed that the aspartame sweetened bars were preferred for their crispiness, taste color and mouthfeel. Further characterization of the bar samples with overall acceptability score ≥ 5.0 indicated that while fruit bars sweetened with aspartame and stabilized using gelatin was higher in crude protein content, the sucrose sweetened bars had higher carbohydrate content. The energy values of the bars ranged between 265.59 and 348.15 kcal/100g. Essential minerals were present in appreciable amounts in the fruit bars samples in this order: potassium>calcium>phosphorus>sodium>magnesium>iron>zinc. The results also showed that the G. kola fruit bars were low in antinutrients and contains beneficial antioxidants and bioactive compounds such as vitamin E, flavonoids, carotenoids, tannins, alkaloids and phenols. The pH of the bars (3.0 – 4.0) and the acidity values (0.16 – 0.22%) is an indication of potential shelf stability of the bars.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".