MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040081409 · doi:10.1079/bjn2001442

A computational framework for a nutrient flow representation of energy utilization by growing monogastric animals

2001· article· en· W2040081409 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Birkett, Kees de Lange

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal Of Nutrition · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonogastricNutrientBiologyAnimal nutritionEnergy balancePlant nutritionRuminantBiological systemAgronomyEcologyPasture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computational framework to represent nutrient utilization for body protein and lipid accretion by growing monogastric animals is presented. Nutrient and metabolite flows, and the biochemical and biological processes which transform these, are explicitly represented. A minimal set of calibration parameters is determined to provide five degrees of freedom in the adjustment of the marginal input-output response of this nutritional process model for a particular (monogastric) animal species. These parameters reflect the energy requirements to support the main biological processes: nutrient intake, faecal and urinary excretion, and production in terms of protein and lipid accretion. Complete computational details are developed and presented for these five nutritional processes, as well as a representation of the main biochemical transformations in the metabolic processing of nutrient intake. Absolute model response is determined as the residual nutrient requirements for basal processes. This model can be used to improve the accuracy of predicting the energetic efficiency of utilizing nutrient intake, as this is affected by independent diet and metabolic effects. Model outputs may be used to generate mechanistically predicted values for the net energy of a diet at particular defined metabolic states.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal Of NutritionSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207