MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2669082756 · doi:10.15232/pas.2016-01589

Technical Note: A characterization of Argentinian pork fabrication techniques

2017· article· en· W2669082756 on OpenAlex
E. K. Arkfeld, B. M. Bohrer, L. Testa, Fanny Guzmán, E. Paván

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 Professional Animal Scientist · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersGraduate College, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversidad Nacional de Mar del Plata
KeywordsMathematicsFabricationFood scienceMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A main concern during the rapid growth of the Argentinian pork industry that has not been addressed is inconsistency and unknowns in carcass cutting techniques and specifications. The objectives of this study were to characterize pork carcass fabrication techniques in the Argentinian commercial pork industry. Pigs (n = 100) from 4 Argentinian pork suppliers were used. Pigs were slaughtered at a commercial pork processing facility and air chilled at 4°C for 24 to 48 h. Left carcass sides were fabricated into 5 primals according to specifications used in the commercial Argentinian pork industry: jamón, carre, pecho con manta, bondiola, and paleta. Weights of primals were recorded immediately after fabrication. Primals were further fabricated into subprimal pieces according to standard procedures of the commercial pork processing facility. Primal and subprimal weights were reported as raw weights and as a percentage of total HCW (head on). Weights of primals and subprimals were characterized as descriptive data and then compared among suppliers. When expressed as a percentage of HCW (head on), the jamón primal was 26.99 ± 0.12% of HCW, the carre was 10.70 ± 0.12% of HCW, the pecho con manta primal was 17.21 ± 0.12% of HCW, the bondiola primal was 6.75 ± 0.06% of HCW, and paleta was 15.79 ± 0.10% of HCW. Overall, the understanding of commercial cutting techniques will allow the Argentinian pork industry to become more consistent, and comparing cuts of primals and subprimals with North American Meat Processors (NAMP) specifications may allow for a greater understanding of the Argentinian pork industry worldwide.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.275 · 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