MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067219098 · doi:10.1255/jnirs.334

Visible and near Infrared Spectroscopy of Beef <i>Longissimus Dorsi</i> Muscle as a Means of Dicriminating between Pasture and Corn Silage Feeding Regimes

2002· article· en· W2067219098 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel Cozzolino, Vaz Martins, Ian Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Near Infrared Spectroscopy · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndigenous and Northern Affairs Canada
KeywordsSilagePastureNear infrared reflectance spectroscopyBeef cattleLongissimus dorsiLongissimus muscleAnimal scienceFood scienceChemistryBiologyNear-infrared spectroscopyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Near infrared (NIR) reflectance spectroscopy was used as a tool to classify beef muscle samples according to their feeding regime. Seventy-eight beef longissimus dorsi muscle samples both intact and minced were scanned in a NIRS 6500 instrument (NIRSystems, MD, USA) in reflectance. A dummy regression technique was developed to differentiate beef muscle samples, which originated from beef feed exclusively on pasture or/and mainly on corn silage feeding regimes. Ninety percent of the pasture-fed beef muscle samples were correctly classified using principal component regression (PCR) and 86% of beef fed on corn silage were correctly classified. Both muscle chemical composition and physical characteristics explained the classification results. The results in the present study showed the potential of muscle optical properties for classification and traceability of meat muscles in the food chain.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Near Infrared SpectroscopySame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207