MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Decision Support Tool to Analyze Food Properties from Near Infrared Spectroscopy*

2023· article· en· W4390493422 on OpenAlexaff
Loïc Parrenin, Rodolfo Lorbieski, John Cleber Jaraceski, Christophe Danjou, Bruno Agard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalibrationNear-infrared spectroscopyComputer scienceProcess analytical technologyPartial least squares regressionSample (material)ChemometricsQuality (philosophy)Machine learningPredictive modellingArtificial intelligenceData miningProcess engineeringMathematicsStatisticsChemistryEngineeringChromatographyWork in processPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) is an analytical technique that is gaining popularity in the food industry due to its low operating costs, rapid analysis and non-destructive sample technique. Numerous studies have shown the relevance of NIR spectra analysis to determine certain quality attributes of food. This makes it attractive for use in quality control and continuous monitoring of food processing. However, the calibration process of NIR is difficult and time-consuming. Depending on the configuration of the NIR instrument, the sample to be analyzed and the attribute to be predicted, the analysis methods and techniques vary. This makes calibration a challenge for many manufacturers. This article aims to develop a decision support tool to assess food properties based on the analysis of selected features of NIR spectra. It intends to provide support to calibrate a predictive model based on NIR spectra. The methodology-based decision support tool was evaluated on cocoa bean samples. The tool suggested using the SG filter technique and PLSR machine learning model to predict the moisture and fat content of cocoa beans. The PLSR model with 4 components trained from 63 wavelengths obtained excellent results for the prediction of moisture content with an R2CV of 0.9 and an RMSEP of 0.28. While the PLSR model with 8 components trained from 166 wavelengths obtained satisfactory results for the prediction of fat content with an R<sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup>CV of 0.93 and an RMSEP of 1.52.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.253 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207