ReviewJournal of food science and technology2026
Automated monitoring of alcoholic fermentation: trends and challenges.
Review in Journal of food science and technology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The progress of fermentation, an important step in spirit production, needs to be monitored regularly to detect possible faults. Automated monitoring of fermentation, however, is often limited to only a few parameters of the mash such as, and mainly, its temperature. With the advance of sensor technology and data analytics, various solutions to automated fermentation monitoring emerged, mainly for the beer and wine industry, however, these are not yet critically evaluated and compared. Thus, scientific articles on automated monitoring of alcoholic fermentation are reviewed and evaluated here according to the type of sensors used, the type of fermented material, and the reproducibility and feasibility of the presented solutions. Possible data analytics methods to utilize are introduced and their pros and cons are discussed. A critical evaluation from scientific and industrial perspectives is provided with prospects for the distilling industry where mashes of various states of matter, inhomogeneity and viscosity can appear. Key findings and conclusions of this review are: Electronic nose and electronic tongue biosensors are a promising direction in the area. A publicly available database on recorded data from e-nose and e-tongue as well as other sensors on fermentation monitoring is needed but still missing. Current solutions on automated fermentation monitoring are rather isolated studies, conducted in laboratories, yet to be evaluated and tested in industrial environments. The use of machine learning techniques in these studies, in general, does not comply with the well-established standards in data science and artificial intelligence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.