ArticleJournal of animal science2021
Using artificial intelligence to automate meat cut identification from the semimembranosus muscle on beef boning lines.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Using artificial intelligence to automate meat cut identification from the semimembranosus muscle on beef boning lines.Journal of animal science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The identification of different meat cuts for labeling and quality control on production lines is still largely a manual process. As a result, it is a labor-intensive exercise with the potential for not only error but also bacterial cross-contamination. Artificial intelligence is used in many disciplines to identify objects within images, but these approaches usually require a considerable volume of images for training and validation. The objective of this study was to identify five different meat cuts from images and weights collected by a trained operator within the working environment of a commercial Irish beef plant. Individual cut images and weights from 7,987 meats cuts extracted from semimembranosus muscles (i.e., Topside muscle), post editing, were available. A variety of classical neural networks and a novel Ensemble machine learning approaches were then tasked with identifying each individual meat cut; performance of the approaches was dictated by accuracy (the percentage of correct predictions), precision (the ratio of correctly predicted objects relative to the number of objects identified as positive), and recall (also known as true positive rate or sensitivity). A novel Ensemble approach outperformed a selection of the classical neural networks including convolutional neural network and residual network. The accuracy, precision, and recall for the novel Ensemble method were 99.13%, 99.00%, and 98.00%, respectively, while that of the next best method were 98.00%, 98.00%, and 95.00%, respectively. The Ensemble approach, which requires relatively few gold-standard measures, can readily be deployed under normal abattoir conditions; the strategy could also be evaluated in the cuts from other primals or indeed other species.
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.