MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296619941 · doi:10.1093/jas/skac247.726

PSVIII-19 Predict Indigestible Fiber Fraction of Barley Plant Silage by Using non-Destructive Mid-IR vs Near-IR Spectroscopic Techniques

2022· article· en· W4296619941 on OpenAlexaffabout
Basim Refat, Peiqiang Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilageFourier transform infrared spectroscopyForageNear-infrared spectroscopyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryFiberFourier transformSpectroscopyNeutral Detergent FiberAgronomyMathematicsMaterials scienceAnimal scienceChromatographyPhysicsFood scienceBiologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of this study was to reveal the potential of using Fourier transform mid-infrared (FTIR) and near infrared (NIR) spectroscopy as tools for the determination of indigestible neutral (NDF) fraction (iNDF) of barley plant silage. A total of 48 barley plant silage samples collected from different farms in Western Canada provinces were analyzed for iNDF. Reference values were matched with NIR and FTIR spectra. Spectral data processing (pretreatments) included first derivative (FD), standard normal variate (SNV), multiplicative scattering correction (MSC), second derivative (SD) and orthogonal signal correction (OSC). Prediction equations were obtained from each model using an external validation set. The determination coefficient of external validation (R2P) of iNDF was 0.62 for FTIR, while 0.41 for NIR and the corresponding ratio performance deviation (RPD) were 1.69 and 1.38 in FTIR and NIR, respectively. Results from this research showed the high potential of applying infrared molecular spectroscopy for the examination of forage plant fiber digestibility. More studies are needed to improve the accuracy and performance of FTIR and NIR spectroscopies in predicting the iNDF of barley plant silage samples.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.288
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207