Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33854157›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Mushroom data creation, curation, and simulation to support classification tasks.

Dennis Wagner, Dominik Heider, Georges Hattab

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Metals Transfer in MushroomJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Dennis WagnerDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Marburg, 35043, Marburg, Germany.
Dominik HeiderDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Marburg, 35043, Marburg, Germany.
Georges HattabDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Marburg, 35043, Marburg, Germany. georges.hattab@uni-marburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predicting if a set of mushrooms is edible or not corresponds to the task of classifying them into two groups-edible or poisonous-on the basis of a classification rule. To support this binary task, we have collected the largest and most comprehensive attribute based data available. In this work, we detail the creation, curation and simulation of a data set for binary classification. Thanks to natural language processing, the primary data are based on a text book for mushroom identification and contain 173 species from 23 families. While the secondary data comprise simulated or hypothetical entries that are structurally comparable to the 1987 data, it serves as pilot data for classification tasks. We evaluated different machine learning algorithms, namely, naive Bayes, logistic regression, and linear discriminant analysis (LDA), and random forests (RF). We found that the RF provided the best results with a five-fold Cross-Validation accuracy and F2-score of 1.0 ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), respectively. The results of our pilot are conclusive and indicate that our data were not linearly separable. Unlike the 1987 data which showed good results using a linear decision boundary with the LDA. Our data set contains 23 families and is the largest available. We further provide a fully reproducible workflow and provide the data under the FAIR principles.

Indexed as

AgaricalesAlgorithmsBayes TheoremComputer SimulationDatabases, FactualData CurationDiscriminant AnalysisLogistic ModelsMachine LearningPilot Projects

Identifiers

PMID33854157
PMCPMC8046754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.