MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967079208 · doi:10.1080/87559129.2019.1655571

Application of Metabonomics Approach in Food Safety Research-A Review

2019· article· en· W2967079208 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

VenueFood Reviews International · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsOntario GenomicsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood safetyRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessQuality (philosophy)BiotechnologyFood qualityFood safety risk analysisConsumer safetyNovel foodRisk assessmentComputer scienceFood scienceBiologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing international trade, food safety is becoming a global health concern, the requirement for food quality increases constantly. There is an urgent need for a new method to identify the potential problems and support policies for regulations. Metabonomics is an advanced tool suitable for the analysis of food safety. This paper shows that metabonomics has favorable prospects for applications in veterinary drugs, banned substances, safety evaluation of genetically modified food, food adulteration, and foodborne illnesses. Although metabonomics has been proven as a useful tool for food safety risk monitoring and assessment, there are still some significant challenges existing in its application.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.279 · 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