MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7030403853

Non-starch polysaccharides in malting barley and their modification during malting and mashing

2017· dissertation· en· W7030403853 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNucleofectionDiafiltrationGestational periodLiquationArticular cartilage damageFusible alloy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of this thesis was on characterizing β-glucans and arabinoxylans in selected Canadian malting barley genotypes, and on investigating the effects of different grain hydration levels during steeping on the content and physicochemical properties of these polysaccharides in malt and wort. The results of the first study revealed that Canadian malting barley genotypes differed not only in the content but also in the fine molecular features and properties of B-glucans and arabinoxylans. In the second study, grain hydration levels showed significant differences in the concentration of B-glucans in malt and wort. The impact of variable grain hydration levels on the concentration of arabinoxylans in malt and wort was less pronounced. Grain hydration levels affected the fine molecular structure and molar mass of β-glucans and arabinoxylans isolated from wort, and showed differences between genotypes. The information generated in this thesis about molecular properties of B-glucans and arabinoxylans may be useful to breeders and end users of Canadian malting barley.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicFood composition and properties→French-language works237,207→