Equivalence of Visual Immunoprecipitate Assay (VIP®) for Salmonella for the Detection of Motile and Nonmotile Salmonella in All Foods to AOAC Culture Method: Collaborative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six foods representative of a wide variety of processed, dried powder processed, and raw food types were analyzed by the Visual Immunoprecipitate Assay (VIP) for Salmonella and AOAC INTERNATIONAL culture method. Paired samples of each food type were simultaneously analyzed; one sample by the VIP method and one by the AOAC culture method. A total of 24 laboratories representing federal government agencies and private industry, in the United States and Canada, participated in this collaborative study. Food types were inoculated with species of Salmonella with the exception of raw ground chicken, which was naturally contaminated. No statistical differences (p < 0.05) were observed between VIP for Salmonella interpretation and the AOAC culture method for any inoculation level of any food type or naturally contaminated food. The method was adopted Official First Action status by AOAC INTERNATIONAL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".