Method for evaluating bitterness-inhibiting and sweetness-increasing effects based on combination of Gface and electronic tongue

Abstract

The invention discloses a method for evaluating bitterness-inhibiting and sweetness-increasing effects based on combination of Gface and an electronic tongue. The method comprises the following steps: preparing a solution to be tested; testing the solution to be tested by using a sweetness sensor and a bitter taste sensor to obtain an electronic tongue sweetness value GL1mV and an electronic tongue bitter taste value BT0mV; utilizing a Gface system to collect dynamic response of a facial action unit before and after the testee tastes the to-be-tested solution to obtain a sweet perception index SPI and a bitter inhibition index BPI; obtaining a sweetening index SI and a bitter inhibition index BII according to the following formula; and determining the bitterness-inhibiting and sweetness-increasing effect type according to the values of SI and BII. The subjective limitation of traditional sensory evaluation is broken through, and a quantification tool is provided for analysis of a taste regulation mechanism of aroma substances and development of low-sugar food through cross-modal association of nerve response and physical and chemical parameters.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of intelligent sensory evaluation technology for food, and to a method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects of aroma substances based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue. Background Technology

[0002] In recent years, with the increasing demand for healthy eating among consumers, reducing the sugar content in food has become an important trend in the global food industry. However, sugar reduction technologies often face problems such as increased bitter byproducts and reduced palatability. Tropical fruits, such as durian, have flavors that highly depend on the synergistic effect of aroma compounds and sugars. Exploring the taste-modulating potential of durian's characteristic aroma compounds and developing low-sugar, high-sweetness formulas has become a technical challenge.

[0003] Aspartame (sodium cyclohexylsulfamate), a commonly used sweetener, induces significant bitterness at concentrations exceeding 0.4%, limiting its application in scenarios requiring high sweetness. The characteristic aroma of durian is composed of esters (such as ethyl 2-methylbutyrate), furans, lactones (such as γ-decanoic acid lactone), and sulfur-containing compounds. Studies have shown that some aroma compounds can influence the perception of sweetness and bitterness through an "aroma-taste cross-modal interaction." However, currently, there is a lack of high-throughput methods for quantitatively assessing the "bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing" effects of aroma components on taste.

[0004] The Gface facial micro-expression analysis system is a neurosensory detection tool based on computer vision and artificial intelligence. It captures the micro-movements of 42 key facial action units (AUs) (such as the contraction amplitude of the zygomaticus major muscle and the relaxation speed of the orbicularis oculi muscle) using a high-precision camera, and establishes a taste-expression mapping model using FACS (Facial Action Coding System). In taste evaluation, the system can quantify in real time the pleasurable reflexes triggered by sweetness (such as the intensity of the smile) and the defensive micro-expressions triggered by bitterness (such as the frequency of brow furrow and nose wrinkle), with a sensitivity of 0.1 mm-level muscle displacement and a temporal resolution of ≤50 ms. Compared to traditional sensory scoring, Gface analyzes the neural response dynamics of taste stimuli in a non-invasive manner, revealing the potential regulatory role of aroma substances and providing central nervous system data to support the "bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement" mechanism.

[0005] Furthermore, traditional sensory evaluation methods rely on manual tasting, which has limitations such as strong subjectivity and low repeatability. Human sensory evaluation of weak taste stimuli is easily affected by cognitive biases: when subjects actively evaluate weakly sweetened samples by drinking them, their judgment requires cognitive processing in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) (such as memory comparison and logical reasoning), leading to hesitation in subjective ratings (e.g., "may be effective, but uncertain"). This conscious intervention introduces two types of errors: the expectation effect caused by subjects subjectively amplifying weak signals based on experimental suggestions, and threshold drift caused by sensory fatigue due to continuous testing and dynamic adjustment of judgment criteria.

[0006] Facial micro-expressions are unconscious physiological responses directly driven by the limbic system-brainstem pathway: sweet stimuli activate the amygdala-nucleus dopamine pathway, triggering approach responses such as zygomaticus major muscle contraction (cheek raise), with a response time of only 0.2-0.8 seconds, much faster than conscious perception (about 1.5 seconds); moreover, facial micro-expressions are interference-resistant, with the intensity of micro-expressions being linearly correlated with the concentration of stimuli and unaffected by cognitive regulation.

[0007] The combined use of Gface and electronic tongue can simultaneously capture physicochemical signals (GL1 / BT0 response of the electronic tongue) and neural responses (micro-expression SPI / BPI index), achieving dual verification:

[0008] As a machine detection method, electronic tongues cannot reproduce the natural sensory experience of humans, resulting in blind spots in their physiological perception of taste regulation.

[0009] Therefore, developing a method that can combine Gface with electronic tongue to evaluate the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects of aroma substances is of great practical significance. Summary of the Invention

[0010] Due to the aforementioned deficiencies in existing technologies, this invention provides a method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects of aroma substances by combining Gface and electronic tongue. Specifically, it is a method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects of aroma substances by combining Gface and electronic tongue, which overcomes the shortcomings of current methods for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects of aroma substances, which cannot achieve a good balance between subjectivity and sensory experience.

[0011] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides the following technical solution:

[0012] A method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue includes the following steps:

[0013] (1) Prepare the test solution, wherein the test solution is a solution with sucrose, cyclamate and the aroma substance to be tested as solutes and water as solvent, wherein the concentrations of sucrose and cyclamate in the test solution are 68000 ppm and 32000 ppm, respectively;

[0014] (2) The test solution was tested using the GL1 sweetness sensor and the BTO bitterness sensor of the electronic tongue system, respectively, to obtain the electronic tongue sweetness value GL1. mV Electronic tongue bitterness value BT0 mV ;

[0015] (3) The dynamic response of the facial action units of the subjects before and after tasting the test solution was collected using the Gface system, and the relevant data were processed to obtain the sweetness perception index SPI and the bitterness inhibition index BPI.

[0016] (4) The sweetness enhancement index SI and bitterness suppression index BII are obtained according to the following formulas;

[0017]

[0018]

[0019] (5) Determine the type of bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested according to the values ​​of SI and BII.

[0020] The present invention provides a multi-dimensional evaluation system for assessing the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects of aroma substances by combining Gface and electronic tongue. Specifically, it establishes a quantitative correlation model of "aroma components-dynamic expression-taste intensity" through multi-dimensional data fusion (sensory perception, taste quantification by electronic tongue, and micro-expression tracking by Gface). This model can be used for evaluation, achieving multi-modal collaborative analysis of physicochemical parameters and neural response data. The above method can realize the dynamic analysis and precise quantification of the olfactory-taste synergistic effect in sugar-reduced formulations, providing a multi-dimensional sensory optimization scheme for the development of low-sugar foods, with good application prospects.

[0021] As a preferred technical solution:

[0022] As described above, in the method for evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effects based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue, the determination of the type of bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effect of the tested aroma substance according to the SI and BII values ​​specifically refers to:

[0023] If SI>1 and BII>1, then the type of bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested is sweetening and bitterness suppression.

[0024] If SI>1 and BII≤1, then the bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested is sweetening.

[0025] If SI≤1 and BII>1, then the type of bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested is bitterness suppression.

[0026] If SI≤1 and BII≤1, the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effect of the aroma substance to be tested is invalid.

[0027] Performance type Judgment conditions Sensory correspondence Sweetening and Bitter-Suppressing (SBM) SI>1 and BII>1 Sweetness was significantly enhanced (SPI↑) and bitterness was significantly suppressed (BPI↑, BTO↓). Sweetening (SE) SI>1 and BII≤1 The sweetness is significantly enhanced, but the bitterness is not sufficiently suppressed. Bitterness suppression (BS) SI≤1 and BII>1 The sweetness was not enhanced enough, and the bitterness was significantly suppressed. Invalid (NE) SI≤1 and BII≤1 There was no significant change in either sweet or bitter taste.

[0028] The above judgment indicators and judgment conditions were determined using a bittersweet mixed base solution of 68,000 ppm sucrose and 32,000 ppm cyclamate as a reference solution. Of course, those skilled in the art can use other bittersweet mixed solutions as reference solutions to determine the corresponding judgment indicators and judgment conditions.

[0029] The determination of the above-mentioned criteria and conditions was based on the target durian aroma substances (ethyl 2-methylbutyrate, γ-decanoic acid lactone, furanone) as test samples, the preparation of test samples with concentration gradients from the olfactory threshold to 10 times the threshold, and the setting of a blank control group (no aroma substances) and a positive control group (with 0.1% vanillin added as a known bitter-suppressing and sweetening substance), and the relevant tests were conducted.

[0030] The method for evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effects based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue, as described above, uses the following formulas for calculating the Sweetness Perception Index (SPI) and Bitterness Inhibition Index (BPI):

[0031]

[0032]

[0033] Among them, Z checkRaise Z represents the standardized contraction strength of the zygomaticus major muscle. browFurrow Z represents the standardized contraction strength of the corrugator supercilii muscle. smile Z represents the standardized synergistic contraction strength of the levator anguli oris / zygomaticus major muscles. mouthOpen Z represents the standardized intensity of jaw descent after lip opening; dimpler Z represents the standardized intensity of cheek muscle microcontraction. lipPress Z represents the standardized tension intensity of the orbicularis oris muscle. chinRaise Z represents the standardized mentalis muscle contraction strength. noseWrinkle Z represents the standardized nasal muscle contraction strength. eyeWiden The standardized orbicularis oculi muscle relaxation intensity; ω checkRaise ω smile ω eyeWiden ω browFurrow ω noseWrinkle ω lipPress ω chinRaise ω mouthOpen ω dimpler The weights correspond to the contraction of the zygomaticus major muscle, the synergistic contraction of the levator anguli oris / zygomaticus major muscle, the relaxation of the orbicularis oculi muscle, the contraction of the corrugator supercilii muscle, the contraction of the nasal muscle, the tension of the orbicularis oris muscle, the contraction of the mentalis muscle, the opening of the lips and the descent of the jaw, and the slight contraction of the buccinator muscle.

[0034] Sweetness-related indicators: zygomaticus major muscle contraction (cheek Raise), orbicularis oculi muscle relaxation (eye Widen), levator palpebrae oris muscle synergistic contraction (smile), mouth opening (mouth Open), and dimple muscle microcontraction, as detailed in the table below;

[0035] Micro-expression indicators Physiological mechanisms Taste association cheekRaise Zygomaticus major muscle contraction Related to feelings of pleasure, sweetness triggers the activation of the "smiling muscles". eyeWiden Orbicularis oculi muscle relaxation Sweetness triggers pupil dilation. smile Cooperative contraction of levator anguli oris / zygomaticus major muscles Classic sweet and cheerful expression mouthOpen Open lips and lower jaw Subconscious reaction when sweet substances spread in the mouth dimpler cheek muscle microcontraction Reflects the tongue tip stimulation response to sweetness

[0036] Bitterness-related indicators: brow furrow activity, nose wrinkle contraction, lip pressure, and chin raise, as detailed in the table below;

[0037] Micro-expression indicators Physiological mechanisms Taste association browFurrow Corrugator supercilii contraction Key indicators of aversion response induced by bitterness nose Wrinkle Nasal muscle contraction Olfactory avoidance response to bitter volatile substances lipPress Orbicularis oris muscle tension Subconscious actions that inhibit the diffusion of bitter substances chinRaise mentalis muscle contraction Bitter taste triggers mandibular retraction response

[0038] As described above, the method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue uses Z-score normalization of micro-expression intensity with reference to baseline data from 3 seconds prior to stimulation. The normalization formula is as follows:

[0039]

[0040] Among them, Z norm Z represents the normalized AU intensity of micro-expressions. raw This represents the raw micro-expression intensity value (Raw AU Intensity); μ baseline The mean microexpression during the baseline period (3 seconds before stimulation); σ baseline The baseline is the standard deviation of microexpressions during the 3 seconds before stimulation.

[0041] As described above, the method for evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effect based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue uses the GL1 sweetness sensor and BT0 bitterness sensor of the electronic tongue system (INSENT's TS-5000Z) to perform multiple repeated measurements (5 times) on the test solution and record the taste intensity data. The results are retained to two decimal places.

[0042] As described above, in the method for evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effects based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue, the GL1 sweetness sensor was activated with 0.01 mol / L KCl solution for 30 minutes before testing, and its sensitivity was calibrated with 5% sucrose solution.

[0043] As described above, in the method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue, the subject gargles with the test solution in an environment free from olfactory interference, and the Gface system simultaneously captures the dynamic response of facial action units (AUs) within 0-5 seconds after stimulation.

[0044] The above technical solution is only one feasible technical solution of the present invention. The scope of protection of the present invention is not limited thereto. Those skilled in the art can reasonably adjust the specific design according to actual needs.

[0045] The above invention has the following advantages or beneficial effects:

[0046] (1) The method of evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effect based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue of the present invention provides a multi-dimensional integrated evaluation system for evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effect of aroma substances.

[0047] (2) The method of evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effect based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue in this invention establishes a quantitative correlation model of "aroma components-dynamic expression-taste intensity" through multi-dimensional data fusion (sensory, taste quantification of electronic tongue, micro-expression tracking of Gface). The evaluation can be achieved by using this model, and multi-modal collaborative analysis of physicochemical parameters and neural response data can be realized.

[0048] (3) The method of evaluating the bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement effect based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue of the present invention can realize the dynamic analysis and precise quantification of the olfactory-taste synergistic effect in sugar reduction formula by applying the above method, providing a multi-dimensional sensory optimization scheme for the development of low sugar food, and has good application prospects. Attached Figure Description

[0049] The invention, its features, shape, and advantages will become more apparent from the following detailed description of non-limiting embodiments with reference to the accompanying drawings. Like reference numerals denote like parts throughout the drawings. The drawings are not drawn to scale; their purpose is to illustrate the gist of the invention.

[0050] Figure 1 This is a step diagram of the method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0051] The present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments, but these are not intended to limit the scope of the invention.

[0052] The construction process of the method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to the present invention is as follows:

[0053] (1) Sample preparation and solvent preparation

[0054] Using a bittersweet base solution (68,000 ppm sucrose + 32,000 ppm cyclamate) as a solvent, characteristic aroma compounds of durian were added to prepare the test samples. A total of 13 samples were obtained, and the specific formulations are shown in the table below:

[0055]

[0056] (2) Sensory experiments and evaluation of sweetness and bitterness

[0057] Sensory evaluation was conducted by 10 trained evaluators (half male and half female) in a standardized sensory chamber (temperature 22±1℃, humidity 50%). Each evaluator evaluated a sample for 10 seconds and then immediately spat it out, with a 3-minute interval between different samples to avoid olfactory fatigue and residual effects. A 9-point scale was used to evaluate sweetness and bitterness (1 = weak, 9 = very strong), with results rounded to one decimal place and described as characteristics. Finally, the percentage reduction in bitterness relative to the control group (BPI%) was calculated. A sucrose + cyclamate base (sweetness 6.8, bitterness 5.0) served as the control group. Sweetness perception gain (Δsweetness) = sweetness score of the test group - sweetness score of the control group. Bitterness inhibition rate (BPI%) = bitterness of the control group - bitterness of the test group × 100%. Significance markers: “∗”: Δsweetness ≥ 0.5 and BPI% ≥ 10%. “∗∗”: Δsweetness ≥ 1.0 or BPI% ≥ 20%. The average scores, Δsweetness, and BPI% of sweetness and bitterness for the control group and test groups 1-12 are shown in the table below.

[0058]

[0059] (3) Electronic tongue detection operation

[0060] The electronic tongue detection operation of this invention is performed according to the following steps: Using the INSENT TS-5000Z electronic tongue system, the GL1 sweetness sensor and the BTO bitterness sensor are activated. Before use, the sensor array is pre-equilibrated in a 0.01 mol / L KCl solution for 30 minutes, and the sensor response curve is calibrated using a 5% sucrose solution (sweetness standard) and a 0.1% caffeine solution (bitterness standard). The sample solutions (40 mL / cup) are arranged in an automatic sample tray according to a concentration gradient. The detection time is set to 120 seconds using the accompanying control software. Data from the 100-120 second stable range is selected, and each sample is measured five times repeatedly, with the results retained to two decimal places. A three-stage cleaning procedure is used—rinsing with ultrapure water for 60 seconds after each detection, deep cleaning for 120 seconds after every five samples, and finally equilibrating the sensor with a blank substrate solution. After the sensor array specifically binds to the sweet / bitter substances in the sample, a sweetness intensity value (GL1) is generated through the change in transmembrane potential. mV ) and bitterness intensity value (BT0) mV The data was automatically parsed and output by the INSENT dedicated taste fingerprint analysis module (Taste Sensing System Software v2.0). The electronic tongue test and sensory evaluation results of the control group and test groups 1-12 are shown in the table below.

[0061]

[0062] (4) Gface (facial micro-expression meter) test

[0063] Test environment: constant temperature (22±2℃), light intensity ≤500 Lux, background wall is neutral gray (Pantone CoolGray 5C) to avoid visual interference. The Gface high-definition camera is fixed 60 cm in front of the subject, with the center of the lens level with the tip of the subject's nose, and the tilt angle is 0° to ensure complete coverage of the facial area;

[0064] The spatial coordinate system was calibrated using an ArUco marker plate, with a positioning error ≤ 0.5 mm;

[0065] Baseline facial expressions were captured from the subjects. After gargling with pure water (25°C) for 30 seconds, the subjects spat it out and maintained a neutral expression for 5 seconds. Gface recorded baseline micro-expression data (including 42 facial movement units such as cheerRaise and browFurrow) at a sampling rate of 5 times / second.

[0066] The baseline was collected three times, and the mean value was taken after removing abnormal fluctuations as μ. baseline With σ baseline μ baseline With σ baseline The test results are shown in the table below;

[0067]

[0068] After the experiment began, subjects in the control group and test groups 1-12, respectively, held the food in their mouths for 5 seconds before Gface recording was initiated (to avoid swallowing interference). Monitoring continued for 15 seconds (covering the peak taste response period). After a 2-minute interval, subjects rinsed their mouths with water to reset the taste receptors. The critical response window of 0.5-3 seconds after taste stimulation was extracted (sweet: 0.8-2.5 seconds, bitter: 0.5-1.8 seconds). Z-score standardization was performed on each indicator. The Gface positive indicators related to sweetness in the control group and test groups 1-12 are shown in the table below:

[0069]

[0070] The positive Gface bitterness-related indices for the control group and test groups 1–12 are shown in the table below:

[0071]

[0072] (5) Calculation of the comprehensive judgment formula:

[0073] The Sweetness Index (SI) and Bitterness Inhibition Index (BII) are calculated using the following formulas.

[0074]

[0075] Wherein, 0.55: the contribution weight of SPI to sweetness perception, derived from the standardized coefficient of the sensory rating regression model; 0.25: the physicochemical detection weight of GL1 sensor for sweetness, determined through PLS analysis; 40 is the reference value of GL1 sensor range;

[0076]

[0077] Wherein, 0.75: the neural response weight of BPI to bitterness inhibition, which was verified by fMRI to be negatively correlated with insular activation; -0.02: the negative correction factor of the BTO sensor for bitterness residue, to prevent misjudgment when the physicochemical detection value is too high; 30 is the reference value of the BTO sensor range.

[0078] The bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects of aroma substances are classified according to the following classification rules;

[0079] SBM (Sweetening and Bitterness-Suppressing): SI>1 and BII>1;

[0080] SE (Sweetening): SI>1 and BII≤1;

[0081] BS (Bitterness Suppression): SI≤1 and BII>1;

[0082] NE (invalid): SI≤1 and BII≤1.

[0083] Example 1

[0084] A method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue includes the following steps (such as...). Figure 1 As shown, test group 1 is taken as the object):

[0085] (1) The solution of test group 1 was tested using the GL1 sweetness sensor and the BTO bitterness sensor of the electronic tongue system, respectively, and the electronic tongue sweetness value GL1 was obtained. mV Electronic tongue bitterness value BT0 mV ;

[0086] (3) The dynamic response of the facial action units of the subjects before and after tasting the solution of test group 1 was collected using the Gface system, and the relevant data were processed to obtain the sweetness perception index SPI and the bitterness inhibition index BPI.

[0087] (4) The sweetness enhancement index SI and bitterness suppression index BII are obtained according to the following formulas;

[0088]

[0089]

[0090] (5) Determine the type of bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance (ethyl 2-methylbutyrate) in test group 1 according to the values ​​of SI and BII.

[0091] Examples 2-12

[0092] The method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combination of Gface and electronic tongue is basically the same as that in Example 1, except that the test subjects are test groups 2 to 12 respectively.

[0093] The SPI, BPI, SI, BII classification results and consistency results of Examples 1 to 12 are shown in the table below;

[0094]

[0095] The above tests demonstrate that this invention, by integrating electronic tongue physicochemical detection with Gface facial micro-expression analysis, constructs a multimodal evaluation system for the "bitterness suppression and sweetness enhancement" efficacy of aroma substances. Based on experimental data from 12 embodiments, this method exhibits significant technical advantages and application value in the field of sweet and bitter taste regulation.

[0096] Experimental results show that the comprehensive judgment formula and classification rules of this application can accurately distinguish between four types of effects: sweetening (SE), sweetening and bitterness suppression (SBM), bitterness suppression (BS), and ineffectiveness (NE). Among them, Example 2 (furanone), Example 3 (limonene), and Example 7 (3-hydroxy-2-butanone) were successfully classified as SBM, with sensory sweetness scores of 8.0 and 7.9, respectively, and bitterness suppression rates exceeding 40%, which are highly consistent with the results of human evaluation. The Pearson correlation coefficient between the model-predicted sweetness score and the actual sensory score reached 0.778 (p<0.01), confirming the scientific validity and reliability of multimodal data fusion.

[0097] This technology can further optimize classification accuracy through algorithm iteration (such as dynamic threshold calibration) and be extended to flavor modulation scenarios such as saltiness enhancement and acidity masking, providing the food industry with standardized cross-category solutions. This invention not only fills the technological gap in the analysis of the taste modulation mechanism of aroma substances, but also provides the health food industry with innovative tools from the laboratory to the production line.

[0098] Those skilled in the art should understand that variations can be implemented by combining existing technology with the above embodiments, which will not be elaborated here. Such variations do not affect the essence of the present invention, and will not be elaborated here either.

[0099] The preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described above. It should be understood that the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments described above, and the devices and structures not described in detail should be understood as being implemented in a conventional manner in the art. Any person skilled in the art can make many possible variations and modifications to the technical solutions of the present invention using the methods and techniques disclosed above, or modify them into equivalent embodiments with equivalent changes, without departing from the scope of the present invention. This does not affect the essential content of the present invention. Therefore, any simple modifications, equivalent changes, and modifications made to the above embodiments based on the technical essence of the present invention without departing from the content of the present invention's technical solutions still fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue, characterized in that: Includes the following steps: (1) Prepare the test solution, wherein the test solution is a solution with sucrose, cyclamate and the aroma substance to be tested as solutes and water as solvent, wherein the concentrations of sucrose and cyclamate in the test solution are 68000 ppm and 32000 ppm, respectively; (2) The test solution was tested using the GL1 sweetness sensor and the BTO bitterness sensor of the electronic tongue system, respectively, to obtain the electronic tongue sweetness value GL1. mV Electronic tongue bitterness value BT0 mV ; (3) The dynamic response of the facial action units of the subjects before and after tasting the test solution was collected using the Gface system, and the relevant data were processed to obtain the sweetness perception index SPI and the bitterness inhibition index BPI. (4) The sweetness enhancement index SI and bitterness suppression index BII are obtained according to the following formulas; (5) Determine the type of bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested according to the values ​​of SI and BII.

2. The method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to claim 1, characterized in that, The determination of the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effect type of the aroma substance to be tested according to the SI and BII values ​​specifically refers to: If SI>1 and BII>1, then the type of bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested is sweetening and bitterness suppression. If SI>1 and BII≤1, then the bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested is sweetening. If SI≤1 and BII>1, then the type of bitterness suppression and sweetening effect of the aroma substance to be tested is bitterness suppression. If SI≤1 and BII≤1, the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effect of the aroma substance to be tested is invalid.

3. The method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formulas for calculating the Sweetness Perception Index (SPI) and Bitterness Inhibition Index (BPI) are as follows: Among them, Z checkRaise Z represents the standardized contraction strength of the zygomaticus major muscle. browFurrow Z represents the standardized contraction strength of the corrugator supercilii muscle. smile Z represents the standardized synergistic contraction strength of the levator anguli oris / zygomaticus major muscles. mouthOpen Z represents the standardized intensity of jaw descent after lip opening; dimpler Z represents the standardized intensity of cheek muscle microcontraction. lipPress Z represents the standardized tension intensity of the orbicularis oris muscle. chinRaise Z represents the standardized mentalis muscle contraction strength. noseWrinkle Z represents the standardized nasal muscle contraction strength. eyeWiden The standardized orbicularis oculi muscle relaxation intensity; ω checkRaise ω smile ω eyeWiden ω browFurrow ω noseWrinkle ω lipPress ω chinRaise ω mouthOpen ω dimpler The weights correspond to the contraction of the zygomaticus major muscle, the synergistic contraction of the levator anguli oris / zygomaticus major muscle, the relaxation of the orbicularis oculi muscle, the contraction of the corrugator supercilii muscle, the contraction of the nasal muscle, the tension of the orbicularis oris muscle, the contraction of the mentalis muscle, the opening of the lips and the descent of the jaw, and the slight contraction of the buccinator muscle.

4. The method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to claim 3, characterized in that, Micro-expression intensity is Z-score standardized using baseline data from 3 seconds prior to stimulation. The standardization formula is as follows: Among them, Z norm Z represents the standardized intensity of micro-expressions. raw This represents the original micro-expression intensity value; μ baseline The mean of micro-expressions during the baseline period; σ baseline The baseline microexpression standard deviation is denoted as .

5. The method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to claim 1, characterized in that, The test solution was repeatedly measured using the GL1 sweetness sensor and the BT0 bitterness sensor from the electronic tongue system.

6. The method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to claim 5, characterized in that, The GL1 sweetness sensor was activated with 0.01 mol / L KCl solution for 30 minutes before testing, and its sensitivity was calibrated with 5% sucrose solution.

7. The method for evaluating the bitterness-suppressing and sweetness-enhancing effects based on the combined use of Gface and electronic tongue according to claim 1, characterized in that, The test subjects gargled with the test solution in an environment free from olfactory interference.

Images