Informal nutrition symposium: Overview of the nutrient requirements of poultry, 10th revised edition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The most recent (9th) edition of the National Research Council’s “Nutrient Requirement of Poultry” report was published in 1994. A new edition of this report is being prepared for release in 2025, by the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM). The 10th edition of the Nutrient Requirements of Poultry publication is substantially updated in terms of the volume of information included, reflecting the goal to serve a more educational purpose than previous reports. Wherever possible, nutrient requirement values have been updated to reflect the most current research. However, for many of the individual nutrients, little work has been done to determine the requirements of modern poultry strains. A preview of the updated NASEM report was presented during the Informal Nutrition Symposium at the 2024 Annual Meeting of the Poultry Science Association. Topics included overviews of each chapter, as well as identification of the substantial research gaps for most nutrients, and a discussion of the use and need for mathematical models to allow for prediction of nutrient requirements of the ever-changing genetics of commercial poultry.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".