Development and Application of a Quantitative Model for Proximate and Ultimate Analysis of Flue-Cured Tobacco Based on Near-Infrared Spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A methodology for predicting proximate and ultimate analysis data was developed by using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIR) combined with chemometric methods. The quantitative model has high accuracy, as evidenced by low root-mean-square-error of prediction (RMSEP) values (e.g., 0.41% for volatile matter and 0.29% for carbon). The model was further applied to tobaccos with distinct aroma profiles, and the predicted ultimate and proximate data lead to aroma classification with 86.6% accuracy. This methodology can be expanded to the aroma discrimination of imported tobaccos from Brazil, the United States, Canada, and Zimbabwe, demonstrating its broad reliability. Compared with traditional analyses, this NIR-based approach offers a fast and accurate method for large-scale tobacco evaluation, highlighting its potential for enhancing tobacco quality characterization through a quantifiable, digital, and high-throughput process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".