Discrimination of edible oil products and quantitative determination of their iodine value by Fourier transform near‐infrared spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work demonstrates the application of partial least squares (PLS) analysis as a discriminant as well as a quantitative tool in the analysis of edible fats and oils by Fourier transform near‐infrared (FT‐NIR) spectroscopy. Edible fats and oils provided by a processor were used to calibrate a FT‐NIR spectrometer to discriminate between four oil formulations and to determine iodine value (IV). Samples were premelted and analyzed in gass vials maintained at 75°C to ensure that the samples remained liquid. PLS calibrations for the prediction of IV were derived for each oil type by using a subset of the samples provided as the PLS training set. For each oil formulation (type), discrimination criteria were established based on the IV range, spectral residual, and PLS factor scores output from the PLS calibration model. It was found that all four oil types could be clearly differentiated from each other, and all the validation samples, including a set of blind validation samples provided by the processor, were correctly classified. The PLS‐predicted IV for the validation samples were in good agreement with the gas chromatography IV values provided by the processor. Comparable predictive accuracy was obtained from a calibration derived by combining samples of all four oil types in the training set as well as a global IV calibration supplied by the instrument manufacturer. The results of this study demonstrate that by combining the rapid and convenient analytical capabilties of FT‐NIR spectroscopy with the discriminant and predictive power of PLS, one can both identify oil type, as well as predict IV with a high degree of confidence. These combined capabilities provide processors with better control over their process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".