Model Prediction of Nutrient Supply to Ruminants from Processed Field Tick Beans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare the Dutch DVE/OEB system and the NRC-2001 model in the prediction of supply of protein to dairy cows from processed field tick beans. Comparisons were made in terms of 1) ruminally synthesized microbial CP, 2) truly absorbed protein in the small intestine, and 3) degraded protein balance. The results showed that the predicted values from the DVE/OEB system and the NRC-2001 model had significant correlations with high R (>0.90) values. However, using the DVE/OEB system, the overall average microbial protein supply based on available energy was 16% higher and the truly absorbed protein in the small intestine was 9% higher than that predicted by the NRC-2001 model. The difference was also found in the prediction of the degraded protein balances (DPB), which was 5% lower than that predicted based on data from the NRC-2001 model. These differences are due to considerably different factors used in calculations in the two models, although both are based on similar principles. It need to mention that this comparison was based on the limited data, the full comparison involving various types of concentrate feeds will be investigated in the future. (
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".