MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085545549 · doi:10.1021/jf000650m

Artificial Neural Network-Based Predictive Model for Bacterial Growth in a Simulated Medium of Modified-Atmosphere-Packed Cooked Meat Products

2001· article· en· W2085545549 on OpenAlexaff
Wengao Lou, Shuyro Nakai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLag timeResponse surface methodologyLambdaBacterial growthArtificial neural networkChemistryBiological systemLagSensitivity (control systems)MathematicsAtmosphere (unit)Modified atmosphereFood scienceChromatographyThermodynamicsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceBiologyBacteriaComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The data of Devilieghere et al. (Int. J. Food Microbiol. 1999, 46, 57--70) on bacterial growth in a simulated medium of modified-atmosphere-packed cooked meat products was processed for estimating maximum specific growth rate mu(max) and lag phase lambda of Lactobacillus sake using artificial neural networks-based model (ANNM) computation. The comparison between ANNM and response surface methodology (RSM) model showed that the accuracy of ANNM prediction was higher than that of RSM. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional plots of the response surfaces revealed that the relationships of water activity a(w), temperature T, and dissolved CO(2) concentration with mu(max) and lambda were complicated, not just linear or second-order relations. Furthermore, it was possible to compute the sensitivity of the model outputs against each input parameter by using ANNM. The results showed that mu(max) was most sensitive to a(w), T, and dissolved CO(2) in this order; whereas lambda was sensitive to T the most, followed by a(w), and dissolved CO(2) concentrations.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations63
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207