Foodomics: A sustainable approach for the specific nutrition and diets for human health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foodomics is an interdisciplinary field that integrates various omics technologies to explore the complex relationship between food and human health in depth. This approach offers valuable insights into the biochemical, molecular, and cellular composition of food by employing advanced omics techniques. Its applications span the food industry and human health, including efforts to combat malnutrition, provide dietary recommendations, and ensure food safety. This paper critically examines the successful applications of foodomics across areas such as food safety, quality, traceability, processing, and bioactivity. It highlights the crucial role of metabolomics, proteomics, and transcriptomics in achieving a comprehensive understanding of food components, their functions, and their interactions with human biology. • Foodomics is an interdisciplinary domain, integrates diverse omics technologies. • Foodomics help in encompassing the mitigation of malnutrition, provision of dietary recommendations. • Issues of food safety, quality, traceability, processing, and bioactivity resolved through this. • AI coupled techniques help in improving the nutrition and improve the food safety and nutrition.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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".