MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250241112 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14648022

Nitrogen-bearing toxins & the environment : food-safety monitoring systems for the quality assurance of vegetable protein products

2021· preprint· en· W4250241112 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lawrence Richard Levinson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMelamine detection and toxicity
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityMcGill University
FundersCanadian Food Inspection Agency
KeywordsMelamineCyanuric acidQuality assuranceFood safetyFood scienceChemistryContaminationFood processingBiotechnologyEngineeringBiologyOrganic chemistryOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multitude of food recalls in 2007 clearly demonstrated that total nitrogen-content (ΣN) determination by means of Near Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS) can be deceived, and should no longer be regarded as a complete quality assurance program for nutritive-protein evaluations. Furthermore, contemporary Canadian-employed analytical tools are precariously limited in their ability to effectively assure a product where there is no a priori knowledge of the environmental toxin(s) involved. In light of these challenges, this study explored a number of new analytical techniques used to assess and furthermore assure the quality of Vegetable Protein Products (VPPs). Using LC/MS/MS/MS technologies, a combination of VPP-based samples were analyzed for the presence of nitrogen-bearing environmental toxins. Of the 117 test-runs, involving an assortment of matrices, Melamine (MEL) and Cyanuric Acid (CYA) were positively identified (> 1 PPM) in 22 and 17, respectively. Subsequent HPLC-UV Amino-Acid-Profiling further confirmed the adulteration of those materials contaminated with Melamine-and-Related-Compounds (MARC).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMelamine detection and toxicityFrench-language works237,207