Figure 1 – uploaded by Leo van Gemert

See full PDF downloadDownload figure

* Wines used in the full inter-comparison study. Details of the eight wine samples used in the proficiency test Table 1 — Table 1 * Wines used in the full inter-comparison study. Details of the eight wine samples used in the proficiency test Table 1

Related Figures (12)

RV coefficient measuring the agreement among the consensus sample maps of the four panels

RV coefficient measuring the agreement among assessors and the panel consensus, and between assessors in each panel

Details in bold represent the expected result. Criteria used to measure the performance of descriptive profile panels, with the specified expected result

Fig. 2. Graphical representation of the performance of panels based on an overall score (including the validation panels). Summary of performance scores for Steps 1-4, together with the total score (Step 5) and the overall performance score

@ Validation panel. RV coefficients for Steps 3, 4a and 4b measuring agreement of each panel with the expected sample map, agreement between assessors and their panel, and agreement among assessors, respectively

Number of significant dimensions (Step 1) and differences between samples (Step 2), together with allocated performance score @ Validation panel. Table 5 Table 7

Fig. 4. Graphical representation of the performance of panels based on number of sample differences (including the validation panels).

Fig. 3. PCA biplot illustrating the high correlation between the var- ious measures of panel performance and the overall score.

Panel Assessors Attributes Scale range Scale type Second validation stage

Panel Assessors Attributes Scale range Scale type

Panel Assessors Attributes Scale range Scale type