An Investigation Into the Sensory Properties of Cookies Made With Luffa Seed Powder
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The seeds are currently a waste product from the luffa sponge (exfoliator) production. Luffa seeds could be a new and innovative sustainable ingredient as they offer nutritional benefits. Before they can be considered for use in different food products, their sensory properties and consumer acceptability need to be determined. The study aimed to use luffa seed powder in a baking application (cookies). Cookies were created with increasing amounts of luffa seed powder substituted into the cookie formulation for the flour. The cookies contained 0% (control), 2%, 4%, 7%, and 9% luffa seed powder. The cookies were then evaluated with a consumer acceptability trial ( n = 96) using hedonic scales, check‐all‐that‐apply, and a comment question. The luffa seed powder at all levels of incorporation negatively impacted the hedonic scores. As the amount of luffa seed powder increased, the participants identified many off‐flavors and textures. The textural properties (dry, hard, and grainy) as well as earthy and aftertaste negatively impacted the overall liking scores of the cookies with 7% and 9% luffa seed powder. The participants also identified that the green color of the cookies containing luffa seed powder decreased their liking. The participants identified that they would be interested in luffa seed powder if it has health benefits or is sustainable; however, currently luffa seed powder does not possess desirable sensory properties when added to cookies.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it