ArticleScientific reports2021
Mushroom data creation, curation, and simulation to support classification tasks.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combination Ensemble and Explainable Deep Learning Framework for High-Accuracy Classification of Wild Edible Macrofungi.Biology · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Emergency Toxicology: Advancements and Challenges.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Review
- Dataset resulting from the user study on comprehensibility of explainable AI algorithms.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Predicting progression from amnestic mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease using longitudinal EEG data: a 12-month cohort study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Metals Transfer in MushroomJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.