Method for evaluating milk coffee, information processing device, and flavor wheel for evaluating milk coffee

Abstract

To provide a method for evaluating milk coffee.SOLUTION: A method for evaluating milk coffee according to the present technique includes: a presentation step of presenting to an evaluator of milk coffee a term list including at least one or two of a term group (A) about the taste of milk coffee, a term group (B) about the scent of milk coffee, and a term group (C) about the texture of milk coffee; and an evaluation result generation step of generating the result of evaluation of the milk coffee on the basis of the group of terms selected from the term list, which the evaluator has selected as term applicable to the milk coffee.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] The present technology relates to a method for evaluating milk coffee, an information processing device, and a flavor wheel for evaluating milk coffee, and in particular to a method for evaluating the sensory characteristics of milk coffee, an information processing device that executes the evaluation method, and a flavor wheel used for evaluating the sensory characteristics of milk coffee. [Background technology]

[0002] Several methods for the sensory evaluation of foods and beverages have been proposed. For example, the QDA (Quantitative descriptive analysis) method, which is one of the sensory evaluation methods, is characterized by using 10 to 12 trained panelists and by using a line scale with anchors at both ends to perform intensity evaluation. For example, Non-Patent Document 1 below describes that a sensory evaluation of milk coffee was carried out according to the QDA method (page 25, right column).

[0003] In addition, sensory evaluation methods according to the type of food and drink have also been proposed. For example, the following Patent Document 1 discloses a method for evaluating the sensory characteristics of foamed milk, which includes (1) a foaming step of obtaining foamed milk by stirring liquid milk in a container equipped with a stirring mechanism, (2) a separation step of leaving the foamed milk to stand until it separates into a foam layer and a liquid layer, and recovering the separated foam layer to obtain an evaluation sample, and (3) an evaluation step of performing a sensory evaluation of the evaluation sample (claim 1). [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0004] [Patent Document 1] JP 2019-39780 A [Non-patent literature]

[0005] [Non-Patent Document 1] Michio Ikeda and 7 others, "Sensory evaluation and taste sensor analysis of milk coffee produced by different manufacturing processes," Journal of Graduate School of Information Science and Technology, Kyushu University, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 23-28, July 2019 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0006] Coffee is often consumed with the addition of milk. The above-mentioned Non-Patent Document 1 describes the evaluation of milk coffee using the QDA method. However, analytical descriptive analysis methods such as the QDA method are burdensome to implement, and may be difficult to apply to product development. Therefore, the main purpose of the present technology is to provide a method for easily and quickly evaluating milk coffee. [Means for solving the problem]

[0007] The present inventors have found that milk coffee can be appropriately evaluated by a specific evaluation method.

[0008] That is, the present technology is A method for evaluating milk coffee, comprising the steps of: A presentation step of presenting a term list including at least one or more of (A) a term group related to the taste of milk coffee, (B) a term group related to the aroma of milk coffee, and (C) a term group related to the texture of milk coffee to an evaluator who evaluates milk coffee; and an evaluation result generating step of generating an evaluation result of the milk coffee based on a group of terms selected by the evaluator from the term list as being applicable to the milk coffee; The evaluation method includes the steps of: The terms included in the term list may be terms selected from a group of terms obtained by having each of a plurality of consumers drink a plurality of types of milk coffee and having the plurality of consumers identify terms that describe each of the milk coffees. The plurality of consumers may be consumers who are not trained in evaluating food and beverages. The group of terms used in the evaluation result generating step may be a group of terms selected by the evaluator using a CATA method. The assessors may be consumers who are not trained in evaluating food and beverages. The group of terms in (A) may include at least one or more of one or more terms related to sweetness, one or more terms related to bitterness, one or more terms related to sourness, one or more terms related to richness, one or more terms related to unpleasant flavors, and one or more terms related to astringency. The group of terms in (B) may include at least one or more of one or more terms related to coffee aroma, one or more terms related to milk aroma, one or more terms related to roast aroma, one or more terms related to fruity aroma, and one or more terms related to soy or wheat aroma. The group of terms in (C) above may include at least one or more terms relating to mouthfeel. In the presenting step, an evaluation sheet for performing one or more of a preference evaluation, an emotional evaluation, and a drinking sensation evaluation on the milk coffee may also be presented to the evaluator. In the evaluation result generating step, an evaluation result of the milk coffee may be generated based on the evaluation result inputted by the evaluator into the evaluation sheet and the group of selected terms. The present technology also includes a step of presenting a term list including at least one or more of (A) a term group related to the taste of milk coffee, (B) a term group related to the aroma of milk coffee, and (C) a term group related to the texture of milk coffee to an evaluator who evaluates milk coffee; an evaluation result generating step of generating an evaluation result of the milk coffee based on a group of terms selected by the evaluator from the term list as being applicable to the milk coffee; The present invention provides an information processing device that executes the above. The present technology also provides a flavor wheel for evaluating milk coffee that includes at least one or more of (A) a group of terms related to the taste of milk coffee, (B) a group of terms related to the aroma of milk coffee, and (C) a group of terms related to the texture of milk coffee. Effect of the Invention

[0009] According to the present technology, milk coffee can be appropriately evaluated. For example, the evaluation method of the present technology can be performed simply and quickly by using consumers as evaluators. Note that the effects of the present technology are not limited to the effects described in this paragraph, and may be any of the effects described in this specification. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0010] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 shows an example of a flow chart of a method for evaluating milk coffee. [Diagram 2] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a detailed flow of a preparation process. [Diagram 3] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a term list. [Figure 4] FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of a summary table. [Diagram 5] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of a milk coffee evaluation system. [Figure 6] FIG. 1 illustrates an example of the configuration of an information processing device. [Figure 7] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of a flavor wheel for evaluating milk coffee. [Figure 8] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of a terminology survey form. [Figure 9] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of an evaluation sheet. [Figure 10] FIG. 1 shows the results of CA analysis evaluated by the CATA method. [Figure 11] FIG. 1 shows the results of PCA analysis of evaluation by the QDA method. [Figure 12] FIG. 1 shows the results of a penalty analysis. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

[0011] Preferred embodiments of the present technology will be described below. However, the present technology is not limited to the following preferred embodiments and can be freely modified within the scope of the present technology.

[0012] 1. Milk coffee evaluation method

[0013] The milk coffee evaluation method of the present technology may include, for example, a preparation step S1 of preparing a term list, a presentation step S2 of presenting the term list to a milk coffee evaluator, an evaluation result generation step S3 of generating an evaluation result regarding the milk coffee based on the terms selected by the evaluator, and an output step S4 of outputting the generated evaluation result, as shown in Fig. 1. Each of these steps will be described below.

[0014] 1-1. Preparation process S1

[0015] In a preparation step S1, a term list for evaluating milk coffee is prepared. In the preparation step, a term list including a predetermined term group may be prepared, or a term group to be included in the term list may be newly prepared. In the preparation step, for example, an information processing device that presents the term list to the evaluator in a presentation step S2 described below may acquire the term list from, for example, a recording medium or via a network. The configuration of the information processing device will be described below in "2. Milk Coffee Evaluation System." The terms included in the term list may be terms selected from a group of terms obtained by having each of a plurality of consumers drink a plurality of types of milk coffee and having the plurality of consumers specify a term that describes each type of milk coffee. An example of the term list will be described below in "1-1-1. Term list". A method for generating the term list will be described below in "1-1-2. Method for creating the term list".

[0016] 1-1-1.Term List The term list includes at least one or more of (A) a group of terms related to the taste of milk coffee, (B) a group of terms related to the aroma of milk coffee, and (C) a group of terms related to the texture of milk coffee. The term list preferably includes the group of terms in (A) and the group of terms in (B), the group of terms in (A) and the group of terms in (C), or the group of terms in (B) and the group of terms in (C), and more preferably includes three of the group of terms in (A), the group of terms in (B), and the group of terms in (C). The terms relating to taste are terms that express the taste (particularly the sensation felt on the tongue) when ingesting milk coffee. Examples of the terms relating to taste include, but are not limited to, the terms (a1) to (a10) described below. The aroma-related terms are terms that express the sense of smell (particularly the sensation sensed by the nose) when milk coffee is ingested. Examples of the aroma-related terms include, but are not limited to, the terms (b1) to (b14) described below. The texture-related terms are terms that express the feel or texture of milk coffee that is sensed by the mouth or pharynx (particularly the lips, teeth, tongue, oral mucosa, or pharynx) when the milk coffee is ingested. Examples of the texture-related terms include, but are not limited to, the terms in (c1) described below.

[0017] The total number of terms included in the term list is preferably 70 or less, more preferably 65 or less, and even more preferably 60 or less. For example, the total number of terms included in the term group (A), the term group (B), and the term group (C) is preferably 70 or less, more preferably 65 or less, and even more preferably 60 or less. By having the number of terms included in the term list be equal to or less than the above upper limit, the term list becomes easier to use for consumers (especially consumers who have not been trained in sensory evaluation). Furthermore, the flavor and characteristics of milk coffee can be appropriately expressed by a term list including a number of terms equal to or less than the above upper limit. The total number of terms included in the term list is preferably 20 or more, more preferably 25 or more, even more preferably 30 or more, 35 or more, 40 or more, or 45 or more. For example, the total number of terms included in the term group (A), the term group (B), and the term group (C) is preferably 20 or more, more preferably 25 or more, even more preferably 30 or more, 35 or more, 40 or more, or 45 or more. A term list including a number of terms equal to or greater than the above lower limit can appropriately express the flavor and characteristics of milk coffee. A term list including a number of terms equal to or greater than the above lower limit can be appropriately used even by consumers (especially consumers who have not been trained in evaluating food and beverages (especially sensory evaluation)).

[0018] The term group (A) includes, for example, (a1) one or more terms relating to sweetness; (a2) one or more terms relating to bitterness; (a3) one or more terms relating to acidity; (a4) one or more terms relating to mildness; (a5) one or more terms relating to astringency; (a6) one or more terms relating to body; (a7) one or more terms relating to Uncleanness; (a8) one or more terms relating to harshness; (a9) one or more terms relating to saltiness; and (a10) One or more terms related to umami These terms are suitable for consumers (especially untrained consumers) to evaluate the taste of milk coffee.

[0019] The group of terms (A) preferably includes at least one or more of (a1), (a2), (a3), (a6), (a7), and (a8). These terms are particularly suitable for consumers (especially untrained consumers) to evaluate the taste of milk coffee.

[0020] The (a1) preferably includes at least one or more of "sweetness," "sugar sweetness," "light sweetness," and "refreshing sweetness." The (a2) preferably includes one or two of "bitterness" and "mild bitterness". The (a3) ​​preferably includes "acidity." The above (a4) preferably includes "mildness." The above (a5) preferably includes "astringency." The (a6) preferably includes "Body". The (a7) preferably includes "Uncleanness." The above (a8) preferably includes "harshness." The (a9) preferably includes "salty". The (a10) preferably includes "Umami". In addition, in the term list, the words in parentheses () are examples of English equivalents to the Japanese words. The same applies to other parts of this specification.

[0021] The term group (B) above includes, for example, (b1) one or more terms relating to the flavor of coffee; (b2) one or more terms relating to the flavour of milk; (b3) one or more terms relating to roast flavour; (b4) one or more terms relating to fruity flavor; (b5) one or more terms relating to fatty flavour; (b6) one or more terms relating to artificial flavour; (b7) one or more terms relating to soybean or barley flavour; (b8) one or more terms relating to caramel flavour; (b9) one or more terms relating to nut flavour; (b10) one or more terms relating to tea flavour; (b11) one or more terms relating to chocolate flavour; (b12) one or more terms relating to green flavour; (b13) One or more terms relating to the flavour of wood; and (b14) one or more terms relating to earthy flavor; These terms are suitable for consumers (especially untrained consumers) to evaluate the aroma of milk coffee.

[0022] The group of terms (B) preferably includes at least one or more of (b1), (b2), (b3), (b4), and (b7). These terms are particularly suitable for consumers (especially untrained consumers) to evaluate the aroma of milk coffee.

[0023] The (b1) preferably includes at least one or more of "Coffee", "Coffee beans", "Espresso", "Instant coffee", and "Ground coffee", and more preferably includes at least one or more of "Coffee", "Espresso", and "Instant coffee". The (b2) preferably includes at least one or two of "Milk" and "Condensed milk". The (b3) preferably includes at least one or two of “Roast”, “Burnt”, “Smoke”, “Charcoal”, and “Tobacco”. The (b4) preferably includes at least one or more of “Fruity”, “Flower”, “Citrus”, “Honey”, and “Cherry”, and more preferably includes at least one or more of “Flower”, “Citrus”, and “Honey”. The (b5) preferably includes at least one or more of "Fatty", "Cream", and "Coffee whitener". The (b6) preferably includes at least one or two of "Artificial" and "Chemical". The (b7) preferably contains at least one or two of "soybean" and "wheat (particularly barley)", and more preferably contains at least "soybean". The (b8) preferably contains at least “Caramel”. The (b9) preferably contains at least one or two of "Nuts" and "Almonds", and more preferably contains at least "Nuts". The (b10) preferably contains at least "tea". The (b11) preferably includes at least one or more of "chocolate", "cacao", and "bitter chocolate", and more preferably includes at least "chocolate". The (b12) preferably includes at least one or two of "Green" and "Grass", and more preferably includes "Green". The (b13) preferably includes at least "Wood". The (b14) preferably includes at least "soil".

[0024] The group of terms in (C) preferably includes at least one or more terms relating to (c1) mouthfeel, which are suitable for consumers (especially untrained consumers) to evaluate the texture of milk coffee.

[0025] The (c1) preferably includes at least one or more of a "crisp texture", a "rich texture", a "creamy texture", and a "rough texture".

[0026] The term list including the group of terms described above is suitable for evaluating milk coffee, particularly for consumers, more particularly for consumers who are not trained in sensory evaluation, to evaluate milk coffee.

[0027] 1-1-2. How to create a term list In the presentation step of the evaluation method of the present technology, the above-described term list may be used, or a new term list may be created. A method for creating a term list used in the presentation step will be described below. Note that the present technology also provides a method for creating a term list used in the evaluation method according to the present technology.

[0028] 2, the method of creating the term list may include a sample preparation step S11 of preparing a plurality of milk coffee samples, a term pool creation step S12 of having a plurality of consumers drink the milk coffee samples and have each of the plurality of consumers identify a term that describes each milk coffee, collecting terms that describe the milk coffee, and creating a term pool, and a term selection step S13 of selecting terms that satisfy a predetermined condition from the term pool. A term list including the group of terms selected in the term selection step S13 may be adopted as the term list used in the presentation step S1.

[0029] The method for creating the term list may include, for example, as shown in FIG. 2, after the term selection step S13, a confirmation step S14 for confirming whether the term list is appropriate for evaluating milk coffee.

[0030] These steps are described below.

[0031] (Sample preparation process S11) In the sample preparation step S11, multiple types of milk coffee are prepared. The multiple types of milk coffee may differ from each other in one or more of the following: coffee origin, coffee roast level, blend ratio of coffee and milk, presence or absence or amount of sweetener (e.g., sugar, etc.), and milk fat content of milk. The number of types of milk coffee prepared may be, for example, 3 to 100, preferably 5 to 90, and more preferably 10 to 80. In this specification, "milk coffee" refers to a beverage made from coffee beans and containing milk, dairy products, or emulsified oils and fats. The beverage may contain a coffee component extracted or dissolved from coffee beans. The milk may be either animal-derived milk or plant-derived milk. The animal-derived milk may be cow's milk (i.e. cow's milk) or other animal-derived milk (e.g. camel, donkey, goat, horse, reindeer, sheep, buffalo, or yak). The plant-derived milk may be soybean-derived milk (i.e. soy milk), oat milk, almond milk, rice milk, or coconut milk. The dairy product means a product derived from milk, particularly a product produced by processing milk. Examples of the dairy product include cream, butter, butter oil, cheese, concentrated whey, ice cream, concentrated milk, skim concentrated milk, unsweetened condensed milk, unsweetened condensed skim milk, sweetened condensed milk, sweetened condensed skim milk, whole milk powder, skim milk powder, cream powder, whey powder, buttermilk powder, sweetened milk powder, modified milk powder, fermented milk, lactic acid bacteria beverage, and milk beverage. Any one or more of these may be contained in the milk coffee. The emulsified oils and fats include, for example, vegetable oil and fat foods and vegetable oil and fat creaming foods, and more specifically, so-called coffee creamers. In this specification, "milk coffee" may be any of "coffee," "coffee drink," "coffee-containing soft drink," "coffee-containing carbonated drink," or "decaffeinated coffee" as defined by the Fair Competition Code on the Labeling of Coffee Drinks and the Like. In addition, in this specification, "milk coffee" may be a beverage that is subject to the Fair Competition Code on the Labeling of Drinking Milk or a beverage that is subject to the Fair Competition Code on the Labeling of Soy Milk. The present technology may be applied to the evaluation of such milk coffee, particularly for sensory evaluation.

[0032] (Term pool creation process S12) In the term pool creation step S12, a plurality of consumers are made to drink the plurality of types of milk coffee prepared in the sample preparation step. Preferably, the plurality of consumers are consumers who have not been trained in evaluating food and beverages. Each of the plurality of consumers identifies and records terms that describe each milk coffee (particularly terms that describe the flavor or characteristics of the milk coffee, more particularly terms that describe the taste, aroma, and texture). All terms identified by the plurality of consumers are collected to create a term pool. The number of consumers identifying the term may be, for example, 3 or more, 5 or more, 10 or more, 20 or more, 30 or more, or 50 or more. The number of consumers may be, for example, 1000 or less, 500 or less, 300 or less, 200 or less, or 100 or less. In the term pool creation step, for example, an information processing device accepts input of terms expressing milk coffee specified by each of the multiple consumers. The information processing device generates term pool data from the input terms. The information processing device used to execute the term list creation method may be different from or the same as the information processing device that presents the term list to the evaluator in the presentation step S2 described below. That is, the information processing device may be configured to accept input of terms identified by, for example, 3 or more, 5 or more, 10 or more, 20 or more, 30 or more, or 50 or more consumers. The number of consumers may be, for example, 1000 or less, 500 or less, 300 or less, 200 or less, or 100 or less.

[0033] (Term selection process S13) In the term selection step S13, terms that satisfy a predetermined condition are selected from the term pool. For example, terms whose usage is less than a predetermined value (for example, less than 0.5%) may be excluded from the term pool. The usage is calculated by "usage (%)" = "(number of consumers who selected a term) / (total number of the multiple consumers) x 100". For example, if the number of the multiple consumers is 210, the usage of a term selected by only one consumer is 1 / 210 x 100 = 0.47%. Therefore, when excluding terms with a usage of less than 0.5%, terms selected by only one consumer are excluded, and terms selected by two or more consumers are not excluded. Additionally, vague and / or abstract terms may be removed from the term pool, and such removal may be subject to expert and / or consumer review. In the term selection step, for example, the information processing device may perform a process of excluding terms that satisfy a predetermined condition from the term pool, for example, a process of excluding terms whose post-use time is less than a predetermined value. In addition, in the term selection step, the information processing device may display the term pool on a display device and prompt the expert and / or consumer to select terms to be excluded. The information processing device accepts the selection of terms to be excluded by the expert and / or consumer. The information processing device then executes a process of excluding the terms selected by the expert and / or consumer as terms to be excluded from the term pool. A term list including the term group remaining after one or more terms have been removed from the term pool in this manner may be adopted as the term list used in the presentation step S1. Alternatively, the information processing device may receive term list data after the removal process from the term pool has been performed, and use the term list as the term list used in the presentation step S1.

[0034] (Confirmation step S14) In a confirmation step S14, an evaluation result obtained by evaluating milk coffee using the evaluation method using the term list may be compared with an evaluation result obtained by evaluating the same milk coffee using another evaluation method. By this comparison, it may be confirmed whether the term list is suitable for evaluating milk coffee.

[0035] The evaluation method using the term list may be, for example, a CATA (Check-All-That-Apply) method. The other evaluation method may be, for example, but is not limited to, a QDA method, and may be, for example, a Flavor Profile method or a Semantic Differential (SD) method.

[0036] For example, multivariate analysis (particularly correspondence analysis) is performed on the evaluation results obtained by the evaluation method using the term list, and plot data (hereinafter also referred to as "first plot data") representing a discrimination pattern of milk coffee obtained by the evaluation method (hereinafter also referred to as "first discrimination pattern") is obtained. The analysis method for obtaining the first plot data may be an analysis method other than correspondence analysis, and may be, for example, multifactor analysis, multidimensional alignment, contingency tables, bar charts, significance testing, or correlation of attributes (visualized via multidimensional scaling, MDS). Furthermore, for example, multivariate analysis (particularly principal component analysis) is performed on the evaluation results obtained by the other evaluation method, and plot data (hereinafter also referred to as "second plot data") representing a discrimination pattern of milk coffee obtained by the other evaluation method (hereinafter also referred to as "second discrimination pattern") is obtained. The analysis method for obtaining the second plot data may be an analysis method other than principal component analysis, and may be, for example, cluster analysis, t-test, ANOVA, multiple comparison method, discriminant analysis, correlation analysis, or Procrustes analysis. Statistical software known in the art may be used to obtain the first plot data and the second plot data. An example of statistical software is XLSTAT.

[0037] The first plot data and the second plot data may be compared to obtain an index of similarity between the data, and based on the index, it may be determined whether the term list is suitable for evaluating milk coffee. The index is, for example, but not limited to, the RV coefficient. If the RV coefficient is significant, the term list may be determined to be suitable for evaluating milk coffee. Statistical software known in the art may be used to obtain the RV coefficient and determine whether the RV coefficient is significant. An example of the statistical software may be XLSTAT.

[0038] In the confirmation step, for example, an information processing device may execute the multivariate analysis process on the evaluation results obtained by evaluating milk coffee using an evaluation method that uses the term list, to obtain first plot data. In addition, in the confirmation step, for example, the information processing device may execute the multivariate analysis process on the evaluation results obtained by evaluating the milk coffee using the other evaluation method, to obtain second plot data. The information processing device executes a process of acquiring an index relating to the similarity of the first plot data and the second plot data thus obtained. For example, the information processing device may execute a process of calculating an RV coefficient using these data. In the calculation process, a value relating to the significant difference of the RV coefficient may be acquired. The information processing device outputs the calculated RV coefficient (and the value related to the significant difference). Using the plot data and RV coefficients thus output, it is possible to confirm whether the term list is suitable for evaluating milk coffee.

[0039] As described above, the present technology also provides a method for creating a term list used in the evaluation method according to the present technology. The term list creation method may include performing one or more of the one or more steps S11 to S14 included in the preparation step. For example, the term list creation method includes performing steps S12 and S13, or steps S12 to S14. The present technology also provides an information processing device that executes the term list creation method. That is, the information processing device may execute one or more of the one or more steps S11 to S14 included in the preparation step, and includes, for example, executing steps S12 and S13, or steps S12 to S14.

[0040] 1-2. Presentation process S2

[0041] In the presentation step S2, the term list is presented to an evaluator who evaluates milk coffee. The evaluator may be, for example, a consumer (particularly, a plurality of consumers), and is preferably a consumer (particularly, a plurality of consumers) who is not trained in evaluating food and beverages. The term list may be displayed on a print medium such as paper or plastic, or may be displayed by a display device such as a display. In this specification, a consumer who has not received training in evaluating food and beverages may be a consumer who has not received training to perform a sensory evaluation of a food or beverage. More specifically, the consumer may be a consumer who has not defined and scaled attributes for performing a sensory evaluation of a food or beverage. For example, in a sensory evaluation using the QDA method, a panel (evaluator) receives predetermined training to perform the sensory evaluation. The untrained consumer may be a consumer who has not received training to perform such a sensory evaluation. In addition, the consumer who has not been trained in evaluating foods and beverages may be a consumer who has never seen the term list presented in the presentation step S2 before the presentation step. In other words, the present technology can be executed even when the evaluator sees the term group in the term list for the first time. Preferably, in the presentation step S2, the information processing device causes a display device to output the term list and present it to the evaluator. The display device may be configured as a part of the information processing device, or may be configured as a device separate from the information processing device. The information processing device accepts an input of the evaluation result by the evaluator. The evaluator evaluates the milk coffee with reference to the term list. A specific example of the evaluation will be described below in "1-2-1. Evaluation using the term list." The evaluator may also perform other evaluations on the milk coffee. Specific examples of such other evaluations will be described below in "1-2-2. Other Evaluations."

[0042] 1-2-1. Evaluation using the above term list

[0043] In the presenting step, an evaluation is performed using the term list as described above. The evaluation may be performed by an evaluator who has drunk the milk coffee selecting terms from the term list that he or she feels apply to the milk coffee. The selection may be performed, for example, according to the CATA method. In this manner, a group of terms to be used in the evaluation result generating step S3 is obtained.

[0044] In order to perform the evaluation, for example, the information processing device displays on a display device a screen that prompts the evaluator to select all terms from the term list that apply as characteristics (flavors or characteristics) felt when drinking each milk coffee. The screen includes, for example, a term list 31 as shown in FIG. 3. As shown in the figure, the term list includes the term groups (A), (B), and (C) described above in "1-1-1. Term List." In addition, a selection box is displayed next to each term. When the evaluator selects the selection box of a term that he or she thinks is applicable on the screen, for example, a check mark indicating that the selection box has been selected may be displayed. In the figure, the order of arrangement of the term groups included in the term list is as described above in "1-1-1. Term List", but this order may preferably be changed for each evaluator, and more preferably the arrangement of the term groups in the term list presented to each evaluator is changed randomly. This makes it possible to prevent, for example, bias in term selection and obtain more appropriate evaluation results. That is, in a preferred embodiment, the information processing device presents a term list including the same term groups to the multiple evaluators, but changes the arrangement of the term groups included in the term list for each evaluator, preferably randomly.

[0045] For example, the information processing device presents the term list, and each evaluator selects, from among the terms included in the term list, all terms that apply to the characteristics felt when drinking the milk coffee (e.g., by clicking or checking a term or a term selection field). The information processing device records the selected terms as the terms selected by the evaluator as the characteristics of the milk coffee. This procedure is performed for each milk coffee to be evaluated.

[0046] The information processing device accepts an input of a selection result of terms for each milk coffee. The information processing device accepts the selection result in a state associated with each milk coffee. The selection result may be input, for example, by an input device (for example, a keyboard or a mouse) provided in the information processing device.

[0047] The term list may be displayed on a writing medium on which a mark indicating that a term has been selected can be written. In this case, the writing medium may be, for example, paper, a paper-like sheet, or a plastic sheet. The evaluator may write the term selection results on the writing medium, and the information processing device may obtain the selection results inputted on the writing medium by a device that reads the selection results, such as an OMR (optical mark reader).

[0048] The information processing device records the selected one or more terms in association with each milk coffee, for example, in a recording medium. The recording medium may be, for example, an information processing device, and in particular may be a storage medium or a recording medium provided in the information processing device. The storage medium may be, for example, a memory. The recording medium may be, for example, an optical recording medium or a magnetic recording medium.

[0049] The evaluation is preferably performed by, for example, 3 or more, 5 or more, 10 or more, 20 or more, 30 or more, or 50 or more evaluators for each milk coffee. The number of evaluators may be, for example, 1000 or less, 500 or less, 300 or less, 200 or less, or 100 or less. In the evaluation method of the present technology, the evaluators may be, for example, untrained consumers. Therefore, the number of evaluators can be increased in this way, which can result in better evaluation results or evaluation results with less variation. That is, the information processing device may be configured to accept evaluation results from, for example, 3 or more, 5 or more, 10 or more, 20 or more, 30 or more, or 50 or more evaluators. The number of evaluators may be, for example, 1000 or less, 500 or less, 300 or less, 200 or less, or 100 or less.

[0050] In this manner, the information processing device obtains the results of the evaluation of each milk coffee using the term list.

[0051] 1-2-2. Other evaluations

[0052] In addition to the evaluation using the term list, an evaluation form for performing another evaluation may be presented. For example, the information processing device may display the evaluation form on the display device on which the term list is presented to the evaluator. In particular, the information processing device may display the term list and the evaluation form on the screen of the display device at the same time or at different times.

[0053] The other evaluations may be, for example, one or more of a preference evaluation, an emotion evaluation, and a drinking sensation evaluation.

[0054] The preference evaluation is, for example, an evaluation of the evaluator's preference for milk coffee. The evaluation sheet for performing the preference evaluation has, for example, an evaluation axis related to preference. The evaluation axis may be, for example, an evaluation axis related to a preference evaluation item such as "tastiness" or "degree of preference". For example, the evaluation axis related to the evaluation item "tastiness" includes seven evaluation stages related to the evaluation axis, namely, "very tasty", "tastiness", "slightly tasty", "neither tasty nor tasty", "not very tasty", "not tasty", and "not tasty at all". The number of evaluation stages is not limited to seven. The number of evaluation stages may be more than one, and may be, for example, any one of 2 to 10. For each of these evaluation stages, a score such as "+3", "+2", "+1", "0", "-1", "-2", and "-3" is assigned. By assigning the score, the evaluation result can be quantified. The assigned score value and the number of stages may be appropriately selected by a person skilled in the art. For example, five scores such as "5", "4", "3", "2", and "1" may be assigned to the five evaluation stages. In this way, the other evaluation uses a score, and thus the usability is increased when combined with the evaluation using the term list. For example, the evaluation result using the term list and the evaluation result of the other evaluation can be used to perform an analysis based on the two evaluation results (e.g., a penalty analysis).

[0055] The emotion evaluation is, for example, an evaluation regarding the emotion that the evaluator has when drinking milk coffee. The evaluation sheet for performing the emotion evaluation has, for example, an evaluation axis regarding emotion. The evaluation axis may be, for example, an evaluation axis regarding an evaluation item of emotion such as "feeling happy" or "feeling joyful". For example, the evaluation axis regarding the evaluation item "feeling happy" includes seven evaluation stages regarding the evaluation axis, namely, "feeling very happy", "feeling happy", "feeling somewhat happy", "neither", "feeling not very happy", "feeling not happy", and "feeling not happy at all". The number of evaluation stages is not limited to seven. The number of evaluation stages may be multiple, and may be, for example, any one of 2 to 10. For each of these evaluation stages, a score such as "+3", "+2", "+1", "0", "-1", "-2", and "-3" is assigned. By assigning the score, the evaluation result can be quantified. The assigned score value and the number of stages may be appropriately selected by a person skilled in the art. For example, five scores such as "5", "4", "3", "2", and "1" may be assigned to the five evaluation stages.

[0056] The drinking sensation evaluation is, for example, an evaluation of the drinking sensation that an evaluator had when drinking milk coffee. The evaluation sheet for performing the drinking sensation evaluation has, for example, an evaluation axis related to the drinking sensation. The evaluation axis may be an evaluation axis related to the evaluation items of the drinking sensation, such as "authentic sensation", "handmade sensation", "freshly made sensation", and "fresh sensation". For example, the evaluation axis related to the evaluation item "authentic sensation" includes seven evaluation stages related to the evaluation axis, namely, "very authentic", "authentic", "slightly authentic", "neither", "not very authentic", "not authentic", and "not authentic at all". The number of evaluation stages is not limited to seven. The number of evaluation stages may be multiple, and may be any one of 2 to 10, for example. For each of these evaluation stages, a score such as "+3", "+2", "+1", "0", "-1", "-2", and "-3" is assigned. By assigning the score, the evaluation result can be quantified. The assigned score value and the number of evaluation stages may be appropriately selected by a person skilled in the art. For example, for the five evaluation stages, five scores such as "5", "4", "3", "2", and "1" may be assigned.

[0057] For example, the information processing device presents the evaluation form, and the evaluator selects (clicks or checks) an evaluation stage that applies to the milk coffee from among the evaluation axes of the evaluation form. The information processing device records the selected evaluation stage as the evaluation stage assigned by the evaluator to the milk coffee. This procedure is performed for each milk coffee to be evaluated.

[0058] The information processing device records the selected evaluation stage in association with each milk coffee, for example, on a recording medium. The recording medium may be the same as that described in 1-2-1 above.

[0059] 1-2-3. Milk coffee and ingredients used in the presentation process

[0060] (Milk coffee) The milk coffee was served to the evaluators after its temperature had been adjusted to the assumed drinking temperature of the milk coffee. All the evaluators were served milk coffee at the same temperature. When it is assumed that the purchaser will drink the milk coffee in a cold state, the temperature of the milk coffee is adjusted to, for example, 15° C. or less, particularly 12° C. or less, and more particularly 10° C. or less before the evaluator drinks it. The temperature may be, for example, 1° C. or more, particularly 2° C. or more, and more particularly 4° C. or more. When it is assumed that the purchaser will drink the milk coffee in a warm state, the temperature of the milk coffee is adjusted to, for example, 40° C. or higher, particularly 45° C. or higher, and more particularly 50° C. or higher before being consumed by the evaluator. The temperature may be, for example, 70° C. or lower, particularly 65° C. or lower, and more particularly 60° C. or lower. The milk coffee may be consumed by the evaluators at room temperature, for example, at a temperature between 15°C and 40°C.

[0061] (container) The milk coffee is consumed by the evaluator in a container. The container is, for example, a cup, particularly a plastic cup. The cup may be covered with a lid. The cup may be configured to hold, for example, 20 ml to 200 ml, particularly 30 ml to 150 ml of milk coffee. The size of the opening of the cup (diameter if the opening is circular, length of the long side if the opening is rectangular) is, for example, 40 mm to 100 mm, particularly 50 mm to 80 mm. The bottom of the cup (diameter if the bottom is circular, length of the long side if the opening is rectangular) is, for example, 20 mm to 80 mm, particularly 30 mm to 60 mm. The height of the cup is, for example, 30 mm to 100 mm, particularly 30 mm to 70 mm.

[0062] (straw) The milk coffee may be consumed, for example, through a straw. For example, a cup with a lid containing the milk coffee is prepared, a straw is inserted into the lid, and the milk coffee is consumed through the straw. The length of the straw may be, for example, 10 cm to 30 cm, particularly 12 cm to 25 cm, and the diameter of the straw may be, for example, 2 mm to 15 mm, particularly 3 mm to 10 mm.

[0063] (Temperature control equipment) The milk coffee is preferably temperature-regulated in a temperature regulation device that regulates the temperature. The device may be, for example, a heating device, a thermostatic device, or a refrigeration device. The milk coffee may be consumed by the evaluator at a predetermined temperature. Alternatively, the composition may be consumed by the evaluator after being taken out of the device and after a predetermined time has elapsed at room temperature. These temperatures and times may be selected as appropriate.

[0064] (Entity performing the presentation process) In the presentation step S2, the information processing device may cause the display device to present the term list stored in the device. An example of the configuration of the information processing device will be described in 2 below. The term list may be presented to the evaluator via a medium on which the term list is displayed. The medium may be a print medium such as paper, a paper-like sheet, or a plastic sheet on which the list is written.

[0065] 1-3. Evaluation result generation process S3

[0066] In the evaluation result generating step S3, an evaluation result of the milk coffee is generated based on a group of terms selected by the evaluator from the term list as being applicable to the milk coffee. For example, in the presentation step S2, if the evaluation described in "1-2-1. Evaluation using the term list" is performed, the evaluation result of the milk coffee is generated based on the selection result in the evaluation.

[0067] In the evaluation result generating step S3, the number of times each term included in the term list is selected by the evaluator for each milk coffee is counted. A summary table is generated using the number of times each term is selected. For example, an information processing device that acquires the evaluation results input in the presentation process generates a summary table with types of milk coffee at the top and terms on the bottom, or a summary table with terms at the top and types of milk coffee on the bottom. In the summary table, the number of times selected is the frequency. In this manner, the information processing device generates the summary table. The summary table is also called a cross summary table. An example of the summary table is shown in FIG. 4. In the summary table shown in the figure, types of milk coffee (samples No. 1 to n) are written at the top and terms (sweet to rough mouthfeel) are written on the bottom. The number of times each sample was selected is also shown.

[0068] In the evaluation result generating step S3, an analysis using the summary table may be performed. The analysis may be, for example, a correspondence analysis. By the analysis, plot data (for example, two-axis scatter plot plot data) is generated. An example of the plot data is described in the following examples. The analysis and generation of the plot data may be performed, for example, by the information processing device. From the plot data, a relative distance between the two milk coffees is obtained. Based on the distance, for example, two or more milk coffees with similar characteristics or two or more milk coffees with dissimilar characteristics can be identified. That is, the information processing device may perform a process of acquiring a relative distance between the two milk coffees from the plot data. The distance may be included in the milk coffee evaluation result generated in step S3. Furthermore, the relationship between each milk coffee and a term can be confirmed from the plot data. For example, a term that characterizes a certain milk coffee can be identified. That is, the information processing device may perform a process of identifying one or more terms that characterize each milk coffee based on the relationship. The identified one or more terms may be included in the milk coffee evaluation result generated in step S3.

[0069] As described above, in the evaluation result generating step S3, the summary table and / or the plot data are generated as the evaluation result of the milk coffee.

[0070] In the presentation step S2, if the evaluation described in "1-2-2. Other evaluations" is performed in addition to the evaluation described in "1-2-1. Evaluation using the term list", an analysis may be performed based on the evaluation results from the former evaluation and the evaluation results from the latter evaluation.

[0071] For example, in the latter evaluation, an evaluation result for each milk coffee is generated based on the score selected by each evaluator for each milk coffee. The evaluation result may be, for example, an average value of the selected scores. For example, the information processing device generates an evaluation result for each milk coffee based on the score selected by each evaluator for each milk coffee.

[0072] When a preference evaluation is conducted, the average of the preference scores selected by the evaluators is calculated for each milk coffee, and this average is used as the preference evaluation result for the milk coffee. Similarly, when an emotional evaluation or drinking experience evaluation is conducted, the average of the emotional evaluation scores or drinking experience evaluation scores selected by the evaluators is calculated for each milk coffee, and this average is used as the emotional evaluation result or drinking experience evaluation result for the milk coffee.

[0073] Based on the evaluation result of the evaluation using the term list and the evaluation result of the preference evaluation, emotion evaluation, or drinking experience evaluation, it is possible to find a relationship between the terms describing milk coffee and the preference, emotion, or drinking experience related to milk coffee. Therefore, these evaluation results are useful for the development of milk coffee. To find the relationship, for example, a penalty analysis, a comparison of products with ideal, or a penalty lift analysis may be performed.

[0074] For example, based on the evaluation result of the evaluation using the term list and the evaluation result of the preference evaluation, a relationship between a milk coffee with high or low preference and the term selected to describe the milk coffee can be found. Similarly, based on the evaluation result of the evaluation using the term list and the evaluation result of the emotion evaluation or drinking experience evaluation, a relationship between the emotion or drinking experience when consuming the milk coffee and the term selected to describe the milk coffee can be found. In this way, in the evaluation result generation process S3, an evaluation result for the milk coffee may be generated based on the evaluation result entered by the evaluator into the evaluation form for making the other evaluation and the selected group of terms.

[0075] For example, the information processing device may execute an analysis process such as a penalty analysis based on the evaluation result inputted into the evaluation sheet by the evaluator and the selection result in the evaluation using the term list, and generate the result of the analysis process as an evaluation result of the milk coffee.

[0076] (Entity that executes the evaluation result generation process) The information processing device that executes the evaluation result generating step S3 may be the information processing device that executes the presentation step S2, but may also be another information processing device.

[0077] 1-4.Output process S4

[0078] The evaluation method according to the present technology may include an output step S4 of outputting the evaluation result generated in the evaluation result generation step S3. In the output step S4, the evaluation result may be output to a print medium such as paper or a plastic sheet, or may be output to a display medium such as a display device. For example, an information processing device that has executed the evaluation result generation step S3 may execute the output step S4.

[0079] 2.Milk Coffee Rating System

[0080] The present technology also provides a milk coffee texture evaluation system that may be configured to perform one, two, three, or four of steps S1 to S4 described in 1 above, and is particularly configured to perform steps S2 to S3 or steps S2 to S4 described in 1 above.

[0081] An example of a milk coffee evaluation system according to the present technology is shown in Fig. 5. As shown in the figure, the milk coffee evaluation system 1 may include, for example, an information processing device 10 and a medium 11 on which a term list is described. The medium 11 may include an evaluation form used for the other evaluations. Furthermore, the milk coffee evaluation system 1 may include an implement (such as a straw (not shown)) used to drink the milk coffee to be evaluated, equipment for adjusting the temperature of the milk coffee, or both the implement and the equipment. These components are described below.

[0082] The information processing device 10 may be configured to execute, for example, step S2 and / or step S3. The information processing device 10 may be further configured to execute step S1 and / or step S4. The information processing device 10 may include one or more information processing devices (hereinafter also referred to as "first information processing devices") that execute step S2 and one or more information processing devices (hereinafter also referred to as "second information processing devices") that execute step S3. One or more (particularly multiple) first information processing devices that execute step S2 and obtain evaluation results by evaluators transmit the evaluation results to one second information processing device that executes step S3. Then, the second information processing device executes step S3. If necessary, the second information processing device executes step S4. This allows multiple evaluators to evaluate milk coffees simultaneously, enabling efficient evaluation.

[0083] An example of the configuration of an information processing device referred to in this specification is shown in Fig. 6. The information processing device 10 shown in the figure includes a processing unit 101, a storage unit 102, an input unit 103, an output unit 104, and a communication unit 105. The information processing device 10 may be configured, for example, by a general-purpose computer.

[0084] The processing unit 101 may include, for example, a CPU (Central Processing Unit) and a RAM. The CPU and the RAM may be connected to each other, for example, via a bus. An input / output interface may be further connected to the bus. An input unit 103, an output unit 104, and a communication unit 105 may be connected to the bus via the input / output interface.

[0085] The processing unit 101 may further be configured to obtain data from the storage unit 102 or record data in the storage unit 102. The storage unit 102 stores various data. The storage unit 102 may be configured to store, for example, any one or more of the following data: The term list data presented in the presentation step S2; In the presentation step S2, selection result data including the type of milk coffee and a term selected about the milk coffee, and The evaluation result data generated in the evaluation result generation step S3; The information storage unit 100 may be configured to store the above information.

[0086] The storage unit 102 may also store an operating system (e.g., WINDOWS (registered trademark), UNIX (registered trademark), or LINUX (registered trademark), a program for causing the information processing device 10 (particularly, the processing unit) to execute the milk coffee evaluation method according to the present technology (particularly, at least one step included in the method), and various other programs. Note that these programs may be recorded not only in the storage unit 102 but also in a recording medium.

[0087] The input unit 103 may include an interface configured to be able to accept input of various data. The input unit 103 may include, for example, a mouse, a keyboard, a touch panel, and the like as devices for accepting such operations. The input unit 103 accepts input of the result of the selection of terms by an evaluator in an evaluation using the term list. The input unit 103 may also accept input of the evaluation results of the other evaluations.

[0088] The output unit 104 may include an interface configured to be able to output various data. For example, the output unit 104 outputs a term list for evaluation using the term list (and optionally an evaluation sheet for the other evaluation). The output unit 104 may also output the evaluation result of the milk coffee in the output step. The output unit 104 may include, for example, a display device and / or a printing device as a device for performing the output.

[0089] The communication unit 105 may be configured to connect the information processing device 10 to a network in a wired or wireless manner. The communication unit 105 allows the information processing device 10 to acquire various data via the network. The acquired data may be stored in the storage unit 102, for example. The configuration of the communication unit 105 may be appropriately selected by a person skilled in the art.

[0090] The information processing device 10 may include, for example, a drive (not shown). The drive can read data (for example, the various data listed above) or programs recorded in a recording medium and output them to the RAM. The recording medium is, for example, a microSD memory card, an SD memory card, or a flash memory, but is not limited to these.

[0091] The present technology also provides an information processing device that executes the milk coffee evaluation method of the present technology. The information processing device according to the present technology may be the above-mentioned information processing device 10, and executes, for example, the step 2, the step 3, or the steps 2 and 3. The information processing device according to the present technology may further execute the step 1 and / or the step 4.

[0092] 3.Flavor wheel for evaluating milk coffee

[0093] The present technology also provides a flavor wheel for evaluating milk coffee. The flavor wheel includes at least one or more of (A) a group of terms related to the taste of milk coffee, (B) a group of terms related to the aroma of milk coffee, and (C) a group of terms related to the texture of milk coffee. The flavor wheel according to the present technology may be referred to, for example, when a consumer expresses the flavor or characteristics felt when drinking milk coffee, thereby enabling the consumer to efficiently find an appropriate expression term for expressing the milk coffee. The flavor wheel may be stored in an information processing device, and for example, the information processing device may display the flavor wheel on a display device. The flavor wheel may also be displayed on a print medium such as paper or a plastic sheet. That is, the present technology also provides an information processing device, a display device, or a print medium that displays the flavor wheel.

[0094] An example of the configuration of the flavor wheel will be described with reference to Fig. 7. The flavor wheel shown in the figure has three circumferential regions. From the center C toward the outside, it has a first circumferential region 201, a second circumferential region 202, and a third circumferential region 203.

[0095] (First Circumference Area) The first circular region is divided into an area labeled "taste" as a term that summarizes the group of terms in (A), an area labeled "aroma" as a term that summarizes the group of terms in (B), and an area labeled "texture" as a term that summarizes the group of terms in (C). Thus, the first circular region includes one or more of an area in which terms representing the group of terms (A) are displayed, an area in which terms representing the group of terms (B) are displayed, and an area in which terms representing the group of terms (C) are displayed.

[0096] (Second Circumference Area) The second circular region is divided into an area of ​​term groups that are further classified into the group of terms in (A), an area of ​​term groups that are further classified into the group of terms in (B), and an area of ​​term groups that are further classified into the group of terms in (C).

[0097] In the first circumferential region, the arc of region A is in contact with the regions a1 to a10 of the second circumferential region, which are the term groups obtained by classifying the term group (A) more finely. The regions a1 to a10 correspond to the above-mentioned term groups (a1) to (a10), respectively. In the figure, the symbols "a1" to "a10" are written to prevent the writing of many small characters from making it difficult to read, but in an actual flavor wheel, expressions representing the term groups are written instead of these symbols. For example, expressions such as "sweetness" are written in region a1. In this way, expressions representing each term group are written in each of the other regions. In this manner, the second circumferential region may include one or more of the regions in which the terms representing the above-mentioned group of terms (a1) to (a10) are displayed.

[0098] Similarly, the arc of region B is bordered by regions b1 to b14 of the second circumferential region, which are obtained by classifying the term group (B) more finely. Regions b1 to b14 correspond to the above-mentioned term groups (b1) to (b14), respectively. In an actual flavor wheel, the symbols in regions b1 to b14 are replaced with expressions that represent the term groups. In this manner, the second circumferential region may include one or more of the regions in which the terms representing the above-mentioned groups of terms (b1) to (b14) are displayed.

[0099] Similarly, the arc of region C is bordered by region c1 of the second circumferential region, which is a more detailed classification of the term group (C). Region c1 corresponds to the term group (c1) described above. In an actual flavor wheel, in region c1, instead of these symbols, expressions representing the term group are written. Thus, the second circumferential region may include an area in which a term representing the above-mentioned term group (c1) is displayed.

[0100] (Third Circumference Area) The third circumferential region is a region in which specific expressions are written. The third circumferential region is classified into the number of expressions included in the flavor wheel. In the second circumferential region, the arc of the region a1 is in contact with a group of regions a1-1 to a1-4 of expressions included in the term group (a1) in the third circumferential region. The group of regions a1-1 to a1-4 in the third circumferential region correspond to, for example, the above-mentioned expressions "sweetness," "sugar sweetness," "smooth sweetness," and "refreshing sweetness," respectively. In the figure, the symbols "a1-1" to "a1-4" are written to prevent the characters from being written too small and becoming difficult to read, but in an actual flavor wheel, these symbols may be replaced with "sweetness," "sugar sweetness," "smooth sweetness," and "refreshing sweetness," respectively. For example, "sweetness" is written in the region a1-1. In this way, each expression is written in each of the other regions.

[0101] Similarly, in the second circumferential region, the arcs of the region group b1 are in contact with the region groups b1-1 to b1-5 of the third circumferential region, which are included in the term group (b1). The same is true for the region groups b2 to b14. The group of regions b1-1 to b1-5 in the third circumferential region correspond to, for example, the above-mentioned expressions "coffee," "coffee beans," "espresso," "instant coffee," and "coffee powder," respectively. In the figure, the symbols "b1-1" to "b1-5" are written to prevent the writing from becoming difficult to read due to many small characters, but in an actual flavor wheel, these symbols may be replaced with "coffee," "coffee beans," "espresso," "instant coffee," and "coffee powder," respectively. In this way, each expression is written in each of the other regions.

[0102] Similarly, in the second circumferential region, a group of regions c1-1 to c1-5 of expressions included in the term group (c1) in the third circumferential region contacts the arcs of the group of regions c1. The region groups c1-1 to c1-5 in the third circumferential region correspond to the expressions and terms described above, for example. In the figure, the symbols "c1-1" to "c1-5" are written, but in an actual flavor wheel, these symbols may be replaced with "crisp," "rich," "creamy," and "grainy," respectively.

[0103] The flavor wheel according to the present technology may have a three-layer structure as described above, but may also have a two-layer structure. For example, the flavor wheel according to the present technology may have a two-layer structure consisting of the first circumferential region and the third circumferential region, may have a two-layer structure consisting of the second circumferential region and the third circumferential region, may have a two-layer structure including the second circumferential region and the third circumferential region, or may have a two-layer structure consisting of the second circumferential region and the third circumferential region.

[0104] The present technology will be described in more detail below with reference to examples, but the present technology is not limited to these examples.

[0105] 4. Working Example

[0106] The texture assessment method according to the present technique may be carried out, for example, as follows.

[0107] 4-1. Preparation, evaluation, and analysis of milk coffee samples

[0108] 4-1-1. Coffee samples and roasts Coffee beans from Brazil, Colombia, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Vietnam (product names: Brazil No. 2, Colombia Supremo, Ethiopia Sidamo Grade 4, Indonesia Mandheling Grade 1, Vietnam Robusta Grade 1; all from Tokyo Allied Coffee Roasters Co., Ltd.) were roasted using a Probat L-5 roaster (Emmerich, Germany) to an L value of 18 or 23. The L value was measured using ground roasted coffee beans with a color difference meter ZE-2000 (Nippon Denshoku Kogyo Co., Ltd.). For extraction, the roasted coffee beans were ground using a grinder GRN-1041 (Nippon Granulator Co., Ltd.) to a particle size of 1000 to 2000 μm to obtain coffee powder. Using a 10.5 L column-type extractor (TOWA TECHNO Co., Ltd.), coffee liquid was extracted from 2100 g of coffee powder under the following conditions. Coffee powder amount: 2100g ·Extraction magnification: 4x ·Extraction temperature: 100℃ The extracted coffee liquid was immediately cooled to below 10°C. As described above, coffee powders with two roasting degrees were prepared for each of the five types of coffee beans, that is, a total of 10 types of coffee powders were obtained. Then, coffee liquids were obtained from each of the 10 types of coffee powders by the extraction operation described above. In this way, 10 types of coffee liquids were obtained.

[0109] 4-1-2. Preparation of milk coffee sample Using the 10 types of coffee liquid, 60 types of milk coffee samples were prepared in the blending ratios shown in Table 1 below. [Table 1]

[0110] The granulated sugar (Hokkaido Sugar Industry Co., Ltd.) in the above table was dissolved in reverse osmosis water before use. In addition, unadjusted milk (milk solids non-fat: 8.3%, milk fat: 3.5%) and low-fat milk (milk solids non-fat: 8.4%, milk fat: 1.5%) were commercially available products (Morinaga Milk Industry Co., Ltd.) and sterilized at 130°C for 2 seconds using a plate sterilizer. Each coffee liquid, milk, sugar, and reverse osmosis water were mixed to obtain milk coffee samples. The milk coffee samples were stored in a dark place at 5°C or below until use.

[0111] 4-1-3. Creating a terminology pool Two hundred and three consumers in their 20s to 50s were asked to drink the milk coffee samples in white plastic cups. None of these consumers had received training in the evaluation of food and beverages. The cups were covered with lids and randomly labeled. That is, the consumers could not see the milk coffee inside the cups. The amount of milk coffee sample in each cup was about 80 ml, and the temperature of the sample was below 10°C. The panelists drank the samples with plastic straws and freely wrote down the taste characteristics in a questionnaire that included a writing column as shown in Figure 8. The evaluation was carried out in a quiet room. The room temperature was 24°C and the humidity was 55%.

[0112] In addition, instead of each of the 203 consumers evaluating all 60 samples, 40 of the 203 consumers evaluated each sample.

[0113] Screening After consumers completed the questionnaire, the terms written in the questionnaire were collected. A total of 456 terms were collected from the questionnaire. Qualitative and quantitative screening was conducted on these 456 terms, and 53 terms were selected.

[0114] The qualitative screening was performed by 12 experts involved in beverage development. The corrective screening excluded duplicate terms. Abstract terms and terms that were considered unnecessary for expressing the flavor or characteristics of milk coffee were also excluded. The quantitative screening excluded terms with a usage rate of less than 0.5%. A term with a usage rate of less than 0.5% is a term that is used by only one of the 203 consumers. 394 terms were excluded in the qualitative screening and 9 terms were excluded in the quantitative screening.

[0115] The 53 selected terms were organized into a hierarchical structure by the 12 experts. Lawless et al. 2013 (Developing Lexicons: A Review, Journal of Sensory Studies, 28(4), 270-281. https: / / doi.org / 10.1111 / joss.12050) was used as a reference for the organization into a hierarchical structure. The hierarchical structure of these terms is shown in Table 2 below.

[0116] [Table 2]

[0117] First, 53 terms were assigned to the second subcategory hierarchy. Next, the similarities between the terms were discussed, and similar terms were grouped together as a term group in the first subcategory hierarchy. In the table, the term groups in the second-level subcategories in the first subcategory hierarchy are arranged in order from top to bottom, but this order was determined based on the frequency with which each term was selected. The higher the term, the higher the frequency. The name of the term group in the first subcategory hierarchy was the name of the most frequently used term among the terms included. Furthermore, the first subcategory hierarchy was divided into three "categories" as shown in the table. The order of the term groups in the first subcategory hierarchy within each category was determined based on the total frequency with which the terms in the second subcategory hierarchy were selected. The higher the first subcategory hierarchy, the higher the frequency.

[0118] 4-1-5. Evaluation by CATA (Check-All-That-Apply) method Of the 60 samples, six milk coffee samples were evaluated using the CATA method. In the evaluation, 74 consumers (34 men and 40 women) in their 20s to 50s were asked to drink the six milk coffee samples from the 60 samples in white plastic cups as described above in "4-1-3. Creation of a term pool."

[0119] The six milk coffee samples are as follows, and the specific compositions are shown in Table 3 below. Sample 1: Brazil No. 2 with an L value of 18 and milk rich type (BL18) of unadjusted milk (unsweetened), Sample 2: Brazil No. 2 with an L value of 18 and coffee rich type (BL18-2) with unadjusted milk (unsweetened) Sample 3: Brazil No. 2 with an L value of 23 and milk rich type (BL23) of unadjusted milk (unsweetened), Sample 4: Brazil No. 2 with an L value of 18 and milk rich type (BL18S) of unsweetened milk (with sugar), Sample 5: Ethiopian Sidamo Grade 4 with an L value of 18 and milk rich type (EL18) of unadjusted milk (unsweetened), and Sample 6: Ethiopian Sidamo Grade 4 with an L value of 23 and milk rich type (EL23) of unadjusted milk (unsweetened)

[0120] [Table 3]

[0121] An evaluation sheet was prepared, including a term list 50 and an evaluation form 51 as shown in Fig. 9. The term list and the evaluation form were displayed so as to be included in each question, as shown in the figure. Each evaluator entered the evaluation results for each sample into the evaluation sheet. As shown in the figure, the evaluation sheet included the 53 selected terms and prompted consumers to select the flavor characteristics they perceived. The evaluation sheet also included an evaluation form for evaluating taste, as shown in the figure. The evaluation form had a seven-point hedonic scale ranging from "very tasty" to "not tasty at all," as shown in the figure. The evaluation sheet prompted consumers to select which of the seven points each sample fell into. The evaluation sheet was created using FIZZ software version 2.51 (Biosystems, Coutemon, France). The 53 terms in the evaluation sheet were arranged randomly when presented to the evaluator.

[0122] The evaluation sheet was displayed on the screen of a display device and presented to each evaluator. Then, each evaluator inputted the evaluation results via the screen. The evaluation was performed in a dedicated sensory evaluation booth. The temperature in the booth was 25°C and the humidity was 55%.

[0123] 4-1-6. Evaluation by QDA (Quantitative Descriptive Analysis) To confirm the validity of the CATA results, the six milk coffee samples were evaluated using the QDA method. The evaluation was performed by a panel of 20 people trained in milk coffee evaluation. The panel was operated according to Stone and Sidel (2004) (Descriptive analysis. In SL Tailor (Ed.) Sensory evaluation practices (pp. 201-245). (3rd ed.) San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press.). Each member of the panel drank eight commercially available milk coffee products and listed 125 terms related to the sensory attributes of milk coffee, divided into four categories: "aroma," "taste," "texture," and "aftertaste." Of these 125 terms, terms that met the following three criteria were selected: 1) all panel members had a common understanding of the taste characteristics that the term implies, 2) the term was recognized from the samples, and 3) it was considered necessary to express the differences in taste characteristics between the samples. The 22 terms shown in Table 4 below were selected as terms that represent the sensory characteristics of milk coffee.

[0124] [Table 4]

[0125] Panel members were trained using 20 milk-coffee samples to memorize these terms and the use of a 15 cm unstructured scale ranging from "weak" (0) to "strong" (15) (Fizz software version 2.51). The training sessions lasted approximately 2 hours each, and training was conducted six times in total, once every 2 weeks. After the training, six milk coffee samples were evaluated by the CATA method. The volume of each sample was approximately 100 ml, and its temperature was below 10°C. The order of tasting the samples was randomized. The evaluation was performed in triplicate for each sample in a dedicated sensory evaluation booth. The temperature in the booth was 24°C and the humidity was 39%.

[0126] 4-1-7.Statistical analysis For the evaluation results by the CATA method, Tukey-Kramer's HSD (honestly significant difference) test, Cochran's Q test, correspondence analysis (hereinafter also referred to as "CA"), and penalty analysis were performed using XLSTAT (Ver. 2020. 5. 1. 1060, Mindware Research Institute, Inc.). For the evaluation results by the QDA method, principal component analysis (hereinafter also referred to as "PCA") was performed using XLSTAT (Ver. 2019.1. 3. 58209, Mindware Research Institute, Inc.). The RV coefficient between CA and PCA was calculated using XLSTAT (Ver. 2020. 5. 1. 1060). The RV coefficient is an index that indicates the similarity between the analysis results by CA and the analysis results by PCA.

[0127] 4-2. Results and Discussion

[0128] (Results of CATA method) The results of CATA analysis of the data obtained by the CATA method are shown in Fig. 10. In this figure, the contributions of the axes F1 and F2 were 68.91% and 21.18%, respectively. Characteristic terms for BL18S were "chocolate," "caramel," and "honey," and the location of BL18S was relatively closer to "sweet," "sugar," and "condensed milk" than the other samples. BL18-2 was found to have characteristics such as "tobacco" and "charcoal," and it was found to have the flavor of dark roasted coffee. EL18, which used Ethiopian Sidamo Grade 4 instead of Brazilian No. 2, was close to BL18. BL23 and EL23, which used medium roasted coffee (L value 23) instead of dark roasted coffee (L value 18), are located on the positive side of the F1 axis (i.e., to the right) from the BL18 and EL18 clusters, indicating that the evaluators perceived differences in flavor resulting from the degree of roasting. In addition, the distance between BL23 and EL23 was longer than the distance between BL18 and EL18, indicating that the difference in flavor between Brazil No. 2 and Ethiopia Sidamo Grade 4 became more noticeable at medium roasts. EL23 was located on the negative side (lower side) of the F2 axis than BL23, and was relatively closer to the “nuts” and “flowers” ​​than the other samples.

[0129] (PCA results using QDA method) Figure 11 shows the results of PCA of the data obtained by the QDA method. In this figure, the contribution rate of the F1 axis was 85.34%, and the contribution rate of the F2 axis was 11.03%. The positive direction of the F1 axis indicated strong bitterness, sourness, and coffee flavor. The negative direction of the F1 axis indicated strong sweetness, milk flavor, and caramel flavor. BL18S is off to the negative side of the F1 axis, i.e., it is shown to have sweet and milky flavor characteristics. BL18-2 falls towards the positive side of the F1 axis, i.e., it is shown to have characteristics of bitterness and coffee flavor. There was a cluster of EL18 and BL18 (referred to as C18) and a cluster of EL23 and BL23 (referred to as C23). C18 was located near the intersection of the axes. C23 was located on the more negative side of the F2 axis than C18. The difference between C18 and C23, which are different in roast degree, was larger than the difference between Brazil No. 2 and Ethiopia Sidamo Grade 4, which are different coffee beans. The distance between EL23 and BL23 was longer than the distance between EL18 and BL18, which indicates that the taste difference between Brazil No. 2 and Ethiopia Sidamo Grade 4 became more noticeable in the medium roast.

[0130] (Comparison of CATA and QDA analysis results) Comparing the CA results of the CATA method and the PCA results of the QDA method described above, the positional relationships of the six samples are similar, although the F1 axis is inverted. In QDA, the strength of flavor attributes such as "sweetness," "bitterness," and "milkiness" of milk coffee are quantitatively evaluated by dividing them into four categories: "aroma," "taste," "mouthfeel," and "aftertaste." On the other hand, in CATA, samples are characterized using multiple descriptive terms. Although the evaluation methods are different, the two evaluation methods obtained similar positional relationships as shown above. The RV coefficient was calculated for these evaluation results, and was found to be 0.944 (P value 0.013), which was significant. The calculated RV coefficient was very close to 0.95, a sufficiently high value. Therefore, it can be seen that the CATA method, like the QDA method, appropriately distinguishes between the differences in samples. As described above, in the evaluation method according to the present technology, it is possible to employ consumers, particularly consumers who have not been trained in evaluating food and beverages, as evaluators, and it is also possible for such consumers to appropriately evaluate the flavor or characteristics of milk coffee, in the same way as in the case of the QDA method using a trained panel.

[0131] (About categories) In the QDA method, the term group was divided into four categories: "aroma," "taste," "texture," and "aftertaste." Furthermore, the term list also contained similar terms (such as "sweet aroma," "sweetness," and "sweet aftertaste"). It is difficult for consumers (especially those who have not been trained in evaluating food and beverages) to evaluate using evaluation items categorized in this way. On the other hand, in the CATA method, as mentioned above, the term list on the evaluation sheet does not categorize the term group in this way, and consumers select the term that they feel applies to the sample. This prevents a decrease in the possibility that consumers will select the term that they feel applies to the sample. Therefore, in the present technology, the term list presented to the evaluator in the presentation step does not need to be categorized. For example, the term list presented to the evaluator in the presentation step includes one or more of the term group (A), the term group (B), and the term group (C) as described above, but the presented term list does not need to state which of the term groups (A), (B), and (C) each term belongs to. For example, in the presentation step, the term group included in the term list may be randomly arranged regardless of (A), (B), and (C). By randomly arranging the terms, bias (such as a tendency for a particular position to be selected) can be eliminated, and better evaluation results can be obtained.

[0132] (Omission of term list generation) While QDA requires time to train a panel, CATA does not require such time. Although CATA requires time to generate a term list, once a term list is generated, it can be used to perform repeated evaluations. Therefore, in the evaluation method of the present technology, a prepared term list can be used in the presentation step, which can reduce the time required for evaluation.

[0133] (About the number of terms in the term list) The flavor wheel disclosed in Spencer et al. (2016) (Using Single Free Sorting and Multivariate Exploratory Methods to Design a New Coffee Taster's Flavor Wheel, Journal of Food Science, 81(12), S2997-S3005. https: / / doi.org / 10.1111 / 1750-3841.13555) contains 99 words. Hayakawa et al. (2010) (SENSORY LEXICON OF BREWED COFFEE FOR JAPANESE CONSUMERS, UNTRAINED COFFEE PROFESSIONALS AND TRAINED COFFEE TASTERS, Journal of Sensory Studies, 25(6), 917-939. https: / / doi.org / 10.1111 / j.1745-459X.2010.00313.x) discloses a sensory lexicon of coffee consisting of 127 terms. Chambers IV et al. (2016) (Development of a “living” lexicon for descriptive sensory analysis of brewed coffee, Journal of Sensory Studies, 31(6), 465-480. https: / / doi.org / 10.1111 / joss.12237) discloses a flavor lexicon of 110 words. These lexicons are mainly for black coffee. More than 1000 volatile compounds and 70 strong odorants have been identified as aroma components of coffee. These numerous compounds contribute to the diverse flavor characteristics of coffee, and as mentioned above, the number of terms to describe the flavor characteristics of coffee tends to be large. The large number of terms included in the term list may make it difficult to use for consumers who are not familiar with the expression of flavor characteristics. On the other hand, as mentioned above, it was found that the CATA method can perform an evaluation equivalent to that of the QDA method using 53 terms. Therefore, the total number of terms included in the term list presented in the evaluation method of the present technology may be, for example, 70 or less, 65 or less, or 60 or less. Also, the total number of terms included in the term list may be, for example, 20 or more, 25 or more, 30 or more, 35 or more, 40 or more, or 45 or more. A term list including terms in such a numerical range is easy to use for untrained consumers. In addition, the fact that the evaluation target is milk coffee is also believed to contribute to the ability to perform an appropriate evaluation even with such a relatively small number of terms in the term list. Adding milk to coffee suppresses flavor release, and particularly affects the smoky or roasted flavor of milk coffee. Therefore, the fact that the evaluation target is milk coffee and the number of terms included in the term list is within the above range (as well as the fact that the evaluators are consumers, particularly untrained consumers) are believed to contribute to the ability of the evaluation method of this technology to perform an appropriate evaluation. In addition, the number of terms, 53, is greater than the number of terms included in the term list used in the general CATA method. The large number of terms may be a burden for the evaluator. However, as described above, since the terms were selected by consumers (especially untrained consumers), it is believed that the evaluator who evaluates the term list that includes those terms will find it easier to evaluate, especially if the evaluator is an untrained consumer.

[0134] (About the selection results of terms included in the term list) The set of terms included in the term list used in the CATA method were, as noted above, terms identified by consumers, particularly untrained consumers. Therefore, preferably, the terms included in the term list are selected from a group of terms obtained by having each of a plurality of consumers drink a plurality of types of milk coffee and having the plurality of consumers identify a term that describes each of the milk coffees. Even more preferably, the plurality of consumers are consumers who have not been trained in evaluating food and beverages. A term list including such selected terms enables even untrained consumers to make appropriate evaluations.

[0135] (Presenting a list of terms on a display device) In the evaluation by the CATA method, as described above, the information processing device displayed the term list on the display device, and the evaluator selected the expression term that he thought was appropriate to describe the sample from the term list displayed on the display device. The evaluator made the selection by clicking the mouse. By using the information processing device and the display device in this way, the evaluator can easily select terms, so that even if the term list contains as many as 53 terms, the possibility of not selecting a term that should be selected can be reduced. The frequency of selection of each term is shown in Table 5 below.

[0136] [Table 5]

[0137] As shown in the table, all 53 terms were selected at least once in the evaluation using the CATA method.

[0138] (Frequency of selection of 53 term groups) As mentioned above, all 53 terms were selected at least once, and as shown in Table 5, for 42 of these, there was a significant difference in the frequency of selection between samples (P value of Cochran's Q test <0.05). For the other 11 terms, there was no significant difference, but this does not suggest that these 11 terms are unnecessary. In the evaluation using the CATA method mentioned above, only 6 samples out of the 60 samples used for terminology generation were evaluated. For these 6 samples, there was a significant difference in 42 of the 53 terms, but if the other 6 samples were selected, the results are thought to be different, and for example, significant differences may be confirmed for the above 11 terms. In other words, the fact that significant differences were confirmed for 42 of the 53 terms in an evaluation of only 6 samples indicates that these 53 terms are appropriate as terms for evaluating milk coffee.

[0139] (Features of the term list) The list of terms is divided into three categories: 14 "taste" terms, 35 "aroma" terms, and 4 "mouthfeel" terms. Of these, 14 terms related to "taste" include a group of terms related to "sweetness." Also, "Zatsumi" is a term used when, for example, one feels something that spoils the original taste. Also, "Gumi" is a term used when one feels an unpleasant sensation on the tongue or throat. These are the uses for which Japanese consumers are familiar with these terms. Therefore, a term list that includes one or two of these terms is appropriate when the evaluator is a Japanese consumer. In addition, "soybean" is not included in the term lists disclosed in Spencer et al. (2016) and Chamber IV et al. (2016). The frequency of use of "soybean" showed significant differences between samples. The correlation coefficient between "soybean" and "refreshing sweetness" was -0.811, the correlation with "sugar" was -0.824, and the correlation with "condensed milk" was -0.748. From these results, it is considered that "soybean" is a popular expression for Japanese people and is a characteristic that is easily felt when unsweetened medium roasted coffee is mixed with milk. Therefore, a term list including "soybean" is effective for evaluating milk coffee. The term list also includes terms related to "milk," such as "milk," "condensed milk," "fat," "cream," and "portioned milk." Furthermore, "caramel" and the four texture-related terms are considered to be related to both milk flavor and coffee flavor. Therefore, it is preferable that a term list for evaluating milk coffee includes not only terms found in existing term lists for coffee, but also terms for expressing the flavors and characteristics characteristic of milk coffee. In addition, the term list may include terms that are unique to Japanese people. This allows for an appropriate evaluation of milk coffee and also provides a term list suitable for Japanese consumers.

[0140] (CATA and preference evaluation) The average preference scores for each sample are also shown in Table 5. The results of the Tukey-Kramer HSD test are also shown in the same table. The test results show that there were significant differences between samples that do not have the same letter. As shown in the table, the average palatability evaluation result for BL18S was 4.78, the highest among the samples. Second were BL18 and EL18, with average values ​​of 4.20 and 4.12, respectively. Third were BL23 and EL23, with average values ​​of 3.86 and 3.57, respectively, although there was no significant difference. The average value for BL18-2 was 2.68, which was significantly lower among the samples (P<0.05, Tukey-Kramer HSD test). There was a tendency for darkly roasted and sweet samples to be preferred.

[0141] FIG. 12 shows the results of the penalty analysis. The penalty analysis shows a significant relationship between the preference evaluation results and the terms selected by the CATA method (P<0.05). Of the 17 terms that showed a significant relationship, 8 terms obtained positive analysis results and 9 terms obtained negative analysis results. The former terms include, for example, "mellow," "body," "milk," and "creamy," which are associated with mildness and milk flavor. In addition, "slightly bitter" was positive, while "bitterness" was negative. "Smoke," "charcoal," and "burnt," which are characteristic of the flavor of dark roasted and strong coffee, were negative results. These results suggest that a certain degree of strength and richness of the milk flavor and a mild bitterness of coffee are important for providing milk coffee with high preference. In other words, it was found that the balance between milk and coffee is important for the high preference of milk coffee.

[0142] As described above, it is understood that in the evaluation method according to the present technology, by combining the evaluation using the term list (especially the evaluation using the CATA method) with the preference evaluation, useful information for improving the preference evaluation of milk coffee can be obtained. Furthermore, it is also understood that by combining not only the preference evaluation but also one or more other evaluations such as an emotional evaluation or a drinking sensation evaluation with the evaluation using the term list, useful knowledge for the development of milk coffee, such as the analysis or improvement of milk coffee, can be obtained. Therefore, in a preferred embodiment of the present technology, in the presenting step, an evaluation sheet for performing one or more of a preference evaluation, an emotion evaluation, and a drinking sensation evaluation on the milk coffee may also be presented to the evaluator. Then, in the evaluation result generating step, an evaluation result of the milk coffee may be generated based on the evaluation result inputted by the evaluator into the evaluation sheet and the group of selected terms. For example, the information processing device executes an analysis process such as a penalty analysis based on the evaluation result inputted by the evaluator into the evaluation sheet and the group of selected terms. The information processing device may generate a result of the analysis process as an evaluation result of the milk coffee.

Claims

1. A system for evaluating combinations of ingredients constituting milk coffee, comprising: a presentation step in which an information processing device acquires a term list including at least one or more of (A) a group of terms related to the taste of milk coffee, (B) a group of terms related to the aroma of milk coffee, and (C) a group of terms related to the texture of milk coffee, outputs the term list on a display device, and presents the term list to an evaluator who evaluates the milk coffee; and an evaluation result generating step in which an information processing device acquires a group of terms selected by the evaluator as being applicable to the milk coffee from the term list, and generates a summary table that is an evaluation result of the milk coffee; Including, The term list is obtained by having a plurality of consumers who have not been trained in evaluating food and beverages drink a plurality of types of milk coffee, and having the plurality of consumers identify the terms that describe each type of milk coffee, and by eliminating terms that are used less than a predetermined value and ambiguous terms and abstract terms used by experts and / or consumers, and First plot data of a multivariate analysis of the evaluation results by the evaluation method using the term list; The evaluation system has been confirmed to be suitable for evaluating milk coffee by comparing the evaluation results by the QDA method with second plot data of multivariate analysis.

2. The evaluation system described in claim 1, wherein confirmation of whether the milk coffee is suitable for evaluation is performed based on the first plot data, the second plot data, and the RV coefficient by performing a process of calculating an RV coefficient using the first plot data and the second plot data.

3. An evaluation system as described in claim 1 or 2, wherein the arrangement of the group of terms in the term list presented to the evaluator is changed randomly.

4. 4. The evaluation system according to claim 1, wherein the group of terms used in the evaluation result generation step is a group of terms selected by the evaluator using a CATA method.

5. The evaluation system according to claim 1 , wherein the evaluators are consumers who have no training in evaluating food and beverages.

6. The group of terms (A) includes at least one or more of one or more terms related to sweetness, one or more terms related to bitterness, one or more terms related to sourness, one or more terms related to richness, one or more terms related to off-flavors, and one or more terms related to harshness. The evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 5.

7. The evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the group of terms (B) at least includes one or more of one or more terms related to a coffee aroma, one or more terms related to a milk aroma, one or more terms related to a roasted aroma, one or more terms related to a fruity aroma, and one or more terms related to a soybean or wheat aroma.

8. The evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the group of terms (C) includes at least one term related to mouthfeel.

9. The evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 8, wherein in the presenting step, an evaluation sheet for performing one or more of a preference evaluation, an emotion evaluation, and a drinking sensation evaluation on the milk coffee is also presented to the evaluator.

10. 10. The evaluation system according to claim 9, wherein in the evaluation result generating step, an evaluation result of the milk coffee is generated based on the evaluation result input by the evaluator into the evaluation sheet and the group of selected terms.

11. An information processing device for evaluating a combination of ingredients constituting milk coffee, comprising: A presentation step of acquiring a term list including at least one or more of (A) a group of terms related to the taste of milk coffee, (B) a group of terms related to the aroma of milk coffee, and (C) a group of terms related to the texture of milk coffee, outputting the term list on a display device, and presenting the term list to an evaluator who evaluates the milk coffee; and an evaluation result generating step of acquiring a group of terms selected by the evaluator as being applicable to the milk coffee from the term list, and generating a summary table that is an evaluation result of the milk coffee; Run The term list is obtained by having a plurality of consumers who have not been trained in evaluating food and beverages drink a plurality of types of milk coffee, and having the plurality of consumers identify the terms that describe each type of milk coffee, and by eliminating terms that are used less than a predetermined value and ambiguous terms and abstract terms used by experts and / or consumers, and First plot data of a multivariate analysis of the evaluation results by the evaluation method using the term list; The information processing device has been confirmed to be suitable for evaluating milk coffee by comparing the evaluation results using the QDA method with the second plot data of the multivariate analysis.

Images