Crystal growth of CO <sub>2</sub> hydrate formed in the system of CO <sub>2</sub> + water + trehalose toward the development of solid carbonated foods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Application of CO2 clathrate hydrate as a constituent of solid carbonated foods is an emerging new idea to utilize the large gas-storage capacity of this material. The CO2 gas concentration of CO2 hydrate is 50 times higher than the CO2 concentration in carbonated water. To design an industrial process for making CO2 clathrate hydrates and to determine the texture of hydrate foodstuffs, understanding the crystal growth dynamics and crystal morphology is essential. This study reports the visual observations of crystal growth of CO2 hydrate in the presence of trehalose under conditions relevant to potential food production. To classify the observation results, the subcooling temperature ΔTsub defined as the difference between equilibrium hydrate formation temperature, Teq and the experimental temperature, Tex was used as an index of the driving force for the crystal growth. The experiments were performed at the ∆Tsub range of 0.8 K to 4.9 K. At any ΔTsub, the formation and growth of the crystals were observed at the interface between the CO2 gas phase and the trehalose solution. The hydrate crystals covered the interface and grew into the liquid phase. The crystal morphology significantly depends on ΔTsub. The shape of crystals was polygonal at ΔTsub < 2.5 K, columnar at ΔTsub ≈ 3.5 K, and dendritic at ΔTsub > 3.8 K. The effects of CO2 hydrate crystal morphology in the system with trehalose, on the dynamics of hydrate slurry and the texture of hydrate food are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".