MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modeling of pH and Acidity for Industrial Cheese Production

2000· article· en· W2131222141 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Paquet, Christophe Lacroix, Jules Thibault

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial neural networkProduction (economics)Feedforward neural networkProcess (computing)Sensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceMathematicsBiological systemFeed forwardProcess engineeringStatisticsFood scienceChemistryArtificial intelligenceEngineeringBiologyControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-layer feedforward neural network was successfully used to model and predict the pH of cheese curd at various stages during the cheese-making process. An extended database, containing more than 1800 vats over 3 yr of production of Cheddar cheese with eight different starters, from a large cheese plant was used for model development and parameter estimation. Neural network models were developed with inputs selected among 33 quantitative and qualitative process variables for final pH of cheese, pH at cutting, and acidity at whey drawing-off and at pressing. In all cases, very high correlation coefficients, ranging from 0.853 to 0.926, were obtained with the validation data. A sensitivity analysis of neural network models allowed the relative importance of each input process variable to be identified. The sensitivity analysis in conjunction with a priori knowledge permitted a significant reduction in the size of the model input vector. A neural network model using only nine input process variables was able to predict the final pH of cheese with the same accuracy as for the complete model with 33 original input variables. This significant decrease in the size of neural networks is important for applications of process control in cheese manufacturing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations29
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207