Reveal 8-Hour Test System for Detection of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Raw Ground Beef, Raw Beef Cubes, and Iceberg Lettuce Rinse: Collaborative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five different food types were analyzed by the Reveal for E. coli O157:H7 8-Hour Test System (Reveal 8) and either the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM) culture method or the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) culture method for the presence of E. coli O157:H7. A total of 27 laboratories representing academia and private industry in the United States and Canada participated. Food types were inoculated with E. coli O157:H7 at 2 different levels: a high level where predominantly positive results were expected, and a low level where fractional recovery was anticipated. During this study, 1,110 samples and controls were analyzed by both the Reveal 8 and by BAM or FSIS by each of the collaborators (2,220 samples in total). For each set of samples, 740 were artificially inoculated with E. coli O157:H7, and 370 were uninoculated controls. The Reveal 8 detected 528 presumptive positives of which 487 were confirmed positive by the BAM culture method. In comparison, BAM and FSIS detected 489 of the 740 artificially contaminated samples as positive. In an additional in-house study performed only on chilled and frozen raw ground beef, 240 artificially inoculated samples were analyzed by both the Reveal 8 and by FSIS. The Reveal 8 detected and confirmed 104 samples as positive compared to 79 confirmed positive by FSIS.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".