A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) method for the generation of external preference mapping using rapid sensometric techniques. | LitMetric

Background: External preference mapping is a powerful tool to explain consumer preference or rejection. Combining the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) multicriteria analysis with rapid descriptive techniques can improve preference map (PREFMAP) results. This study was conducted to compare the PREFMAPs generated with rapid descriptive flash profile (FP), check-all-that-apply (CATA), and Napping® versus PREFMAPs constructed with FP-TOPSIS, CATA-TOPSIS, and Napping-TOPSIS.

Results: Only 38.46%, 63.66%, and 42% of sensory attributes initially generated by FP, CATA, and Napping techniques respectively were considered for the determination of their weight W and allocation as positive or negative in the TOPSIS technique. The PREFMAPs constructed with FP-TOPSIS, CATA-TOPSIS, and Napping-TOPSIS presented a better explanation of the preference and rejection than the PREFMAPs directly generated with rapid sensory techniques. The results of the multiple factor analysis and coefficient Rv indicated similarities in the sensory vocabularies used after the TOPSIS technique.

Conclusion: The combination of the TOPSIS technique with rapid sensory techniques is a reliable alternative for the construction of PREFMAPs in order to identify the sensory attributes responsible for preference and rejection of food products. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.10959DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

preference rejection
12
technique order
8
preference
8
order preference
8
preference similarity
8
similarity ideal
8
ideal solution
8
solution topsis
8
external preference
8
preference mapping
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!