MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394581184 · doi:10.1002/admt.202301347

Recent Progress in Intelligent Packaging for Seafood and Meat Quality Monitoring

2024· article· en· W4394581184 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Nami, Mahtab Taheri, Junaid Siddiqui, Imran A. Deen, Muthukumaran Packirisamy, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Materials Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Active packagingBusinessFood scienceComputer scienceFood packagingEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Food waste plays a crucial role in environmental and human health issues. To address these issues, intelligent packaging systems are proposed for the accurate assessment of the quality of food products. Intelligent packaging is a technology that integrates sensing systems with conventional packaging to provide smart sensing communication functions for real‐time food quality monitoring. The most important parts of this technology are generally classified as quantitative sensors (sensors) and qualitative sensors (indicators). Since seafood and meat products can spoil easily if not stored properly, applying intelligent packaging for real‐time monitoring of the safety of these products is beneficial. In this review, the spoiling process and essential performance characteristics are indicators of the quality of these food products are first discussed. Then, The characteristics and importance of various sensors and indicators that can be used for seafood and meat quality monitoring are presented. While discussing these topics, an updated review of recent scientific studies, preconditions, materials, advantages, and limitations are provided. Furthermore, the future need for improvements in intelligent packaging systems for real‐time quality and safety monitoring of food products is discussed. Finally, several important research examples of the challenges and perspectives of intelligent packaging applications for meat and seafood quality monitoring are presented.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations59
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Materials TechnologiesSame topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207