Optimisation modelling to improve the diets of First Nations individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the feasibility of linear programming (LP) to develop diets that were economical, included traditional (cultural, non-market) foods and met the dietary reference intakes (DRI) in a Canadian Indigenous population. Diet optimisation using LP is a mathematical technique that can develop food-based dietary guidelines for healthy eating in Indigenous populations where food insecurity, availability and cost are important considerations. It is a means of developing nutritionally optimal food combinations that are based on economical and culture-specific foods. Observed food consumption data were derived using 24-h food recalls from the First Nations Food, Nutrition and Environment Study. The LP models were constructed to develop diets meeting DRI, cost and food constraints. Achieving the recommended food intake was not feasible in a model meeting all nutrient requirements. Models that met most nutrient requirements at reduced cost were designed for men and women, separately. In women, it was necessary to increase energy intake to meet most nutrient requirements. Nutrient requirements could not be met for fibre, linoleic and linolenic acids, vitamin D, Ca and K in both sexes, P in women, and Mg and vitamin A in men. Using LP to develop optimal diets for First Nations people, we found simultaneous achievement of all DRI was difficult, suggesting that supplementation might be necessary which goes against recommendations for individuals to meet their nutrient needs through healthy eating patterns. Additionally, to make diets feasible, programmes to reduce market food costs and to support First Nations people in traditional food harvesting are recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".