Table 4.
Cluster # | Size | Silhouette | Label (LSI a) | Label (LLR a) | Label (MI a) | Mean (Year) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 83 | 0.737 | Modena | Multivariate calibration | Powerful combination | 2004 |
1 | 75 | 0.692 | Vinegar | Fermented beverage | Pomegranate vinegar | 2012 |
2 | 73 | 0.810 | Acetic acid bacteria | Vinegar production | Pomegranate vinegar | 2007 |
3 | 57 | 0.602 | Maceration | New sherry | Oat vinegar | 2010 |
4 | 53 | 0.623 | Vinegar | Bioactive compound | Aroma constituent | 2014 |
5 | 43 | 0.842 | Vinegar | Bacterial diversity | Benchmarking laboratory-scale pomegranate vinegar | 2012 |
6 | 36 | 0.945 | Vinegar | Healthy subject | Vinegar intake | 2003 |
7 | 36 | 0.868 | Sorptive extraction | Typical aroma | Concentrated fruit vinegar | 2005 |
8 | 33 | 0.911 | Protected designation | Candida species | Spanish wine vinegar | 2011 |
9 | 21 | 0.955 | Vinegar | Euphorbia kansui | Cell membrane constituent | 2013 |
11 | 13 | 0.988 | Characterization | Electronic nose | Using gas chromatography | 1994 |
12 | 11 | 0.991 | Vinegar residue | Vinegar residue | Using vinegar residue biochar | 2014 |
a Label algorithm, LSI: latent semantic indexing; LLR: log-likelihood ratio; MI: mutual information.