MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060547382 · doi:10.1021/jf401279w

Authentication of the Botanical and Geographical Origin of Distillers Dried Grains and Solubles (DDGS) by FT-IR Spectroscopy

2013· article· en· W2060547382 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thorben Nietner, M. Pfister, Marcus A. Glomb, Carsten Fauhl‐Hassek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisFood scienceLinear discriminant analysisEuropean unionChemistryRaw materialQuadratic classifierMathematicsHorticultureBiologyStatisticsComputer scienceSupport vector machineOrganic chemistryBusinessArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distillers dried grains and solubles (DDGS) were investigated with attenuated total reflection FT-IR spectroscopy both directly in their solid state and as the isolated oils (fat fractions). The collected spectra were evaluated in a first step with principal component analysis (PCA) according to the botanical origin (corn, rice, wheat) and the geographical origin (Canada, China, European Union, India, United States) of the DDGS. In a second step, statistical models were constructed for the characterization of the botanical and geographical origin using linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and soft independent modeling of class analogy (SIMCA). For this purpose, the botanical origin was investigated more deeply for corn and wheat as the most important raw materials used for DDGS production. Also, the geographical origin was investigated exemplary for corn DDGS, derived from China and the United States. Models were validated by a randomized batchwise procedure and showed satisfactory classification rates, in most cases better than 80% correct classification.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207