MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144374444 · doi:10.1017/s002185961000105x

Predicting carcass energy content and composition in broilers using the group method of data handling-type neural networks

2010· article· en· W2144374444 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Agricultural Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicStatistical and Computational Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbdominal fatCarcass weightFood scienceAnimal scienceBody weightBiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY The success of poultry meat production has been strongly related to improvements in growth and carcass yield, mainly by increasing breast proportion and reducing carcass fat. Conventional laboratory techniques for determining carcass composition are expensive, cumbersome and time consuming. These disadvantages have prompted a search for alternative methods. In this respect, the potential benefits from modelling growth are considerable. Neural networks (NNs) are a relatively new option for modelling growth in animal production systems. One self-organizing sub-model of artificial NN is the group method of data handling-type NN (GMDH-type NN). The present study aimed at applying the GMDH-type NNs to data from two studies with broilers in order to predict carcass energy ( C En , MJ/g) content and relative growth (g/g of body weight) of carcass components (carcass protein, breast muscle, leg and thigh muscles, carcass fat, abdominal fat, skin fat and visceral fat). The effective input variables involved in the prediction of C En and carcass fat content using data from the first study were dietary metabolizable energy (ME, kJ/kg), crude protein (CP, g/kg of diet), fat (g/kg of diet) and crude fibre (CF, g/kg of diet). For data from the second study, the effective input variables involved in the prediction of carcass components were dietary ME (MJ/kg), CP (g/kg of diet), methionine (g/kg of diet), lysine (g/kg of diet) and body weight (kg). Quantitative examination of the goodness of fit, using R 2 and error measurement indices, for the predictive models proposed by the GMDH-type NN revealed close agreement between observed and predicted values of C En and carcass components.

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.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.234 · 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