The Influence of Concentration by a Membrane Nanofiltration Process on the Aroma Compounds of Conventional and Organic Cabernet Sauvignon Wine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aroma vina predstavlja jedan od glavnih parametara kvalitete vina. Spojevi arome nastaju prilikom dozrijevanja grožđa, tijekom procesa fermentacije i dozrijevanja vina. Aromatski profil vina se mijenja kada se vino podvrgava koncentriranju primjenom procesa nanofiltracije. Stoga, cilj ovog diplomskog rada jest ustanoviti kako koncentriranje vina nanofiltracijom utječe na tvari arome konvencionalnog i ekološki proizvedenog vina sorte Cabernet Sauvignon. Postupak koncentriranja proveo se primjenom i bez primjene hlađenja, pri radnim tlakovima od 25, 35, 45 i 55 bara na laboratorijskom uređaju LabUnit M20 s pločastom modulom i membranama kompozitne strukture tipa Alfa Laval NF M20. Uz pomoć mikroekstrakcije na čvrstoj fazi (SPME) i instrumentalne plinske kromatografije odredio se kvantitativni udio aromatičnih sastojaka. Na temelju dobivenih rezultata vidljivo je da primijenjeni procesni parametri, temperatura i tlak, uvelike utječu na zadržavanje spojeva arome u vinskim koncentratima. Najveće zadržavanje aromatskih spojeva u vinskim koncentratima (konvencionalnim i ekološkim) dobiveno je nanofiltracijom pri 55 bara uz hlađenje, dok su procesi koncentriranja konvencionalnog i ekološkog vina bez hlađenja rezultirali određenim gubitkom pojedinih tvari arome.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".