Ensiling of food waste for subsequent inclusion in ruminant diets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is growing global concern about food waste, leading to increased interest in using it as livestock feed. However, since most food waste is high in moisture, it spoils quickly, making it necessary to feed it immediately or preserve it for subsequent feeding. Drying can reduce the moisture content of food waste, but the combustion of fossil fuels adds to feed costs and emits greenhouse gases. As a result, ensiling of food waste may be a more desirable preservation technique. Various cull crops and by-products have been successfully ensiled to generate high quality feed for ruminants. However, the ensiling of food waste presents its own challenges due to variability in chemical composition and moisture levels that are unsuitable for ensiling. Additionally, the nutrient content of food waste is often unpredictable and high in fibre, making it more suitable as a feed for ruminants than for swine or poultry. Food waste silage has the potential to improve the sustainability of ruminant production systems while addressing the global food waste crisis.
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 | 0.001 | 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".