Cited by 1Coffee research and impactsFood Chemistry and Fat AnalysisFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Concentration gradient inversion via sedimentation of coffee grounds in full immersion brewing

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2023.111619

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 38 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1

Metadata

Authors
Liang, J., Brown, H. G., Dunkin, M. M., & Ristenpart, W. D.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Ristenpart, William D.
Venue
Journal of Food Engineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-11
Volume
357
Pages
111619
ISSN
0260-8774 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4381481171
Cited by
1
References
38
Citations by year
2024: 1
FWCI
0.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Food Engineering (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Coffee research and impacts
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Chemistry and Fat Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Keywords
coffee grounds, sedimentation, total dissolved solids, buoyancy, cupping therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review