Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36298140›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Qualitative and Quantitative Detection of Food Adulteration Using a Smart E-Nose.

Kranthi Kumar Pulluri, Vaegae Naveen Kumar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

2 authors.

Kranthi Kumar PulluriSchool of Electronics Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore 632014, India.ORCID 0000-0003-4967-1166
Vaegae Naveen KumarSchool of Electronics Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore 632014, India.ORCID 0000-0002-0292-697X

Funding

Vellore Institute of Technology University VIT SEED GRANT 2631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food adulteration is the most serious problem found in the food industry as it harms people's healths and undermines their beliefs. The present study is focused on designing and developing a smart electronic nose (SE-Nose) for the qualitative and quantitative fast-track detection of food adulteration. The SE-Nose methodology is comprised of a dataset, sample slicing window protocol, normalization, pattern recognition, and output blocks. The dataset pork adulteration in beef is used to validate the SE-Nose methodology. The sample slicing window protocol extracts the early part of the signal. The sample slicing window protocol and pattern recognition models (classification and regression models) together achieved the high-performance and fast-track detection of pork adulteration in beef. With classification models, the qualitative analysis of adulteration is measured, and with regression models, the quantitative analysis of adulteration is measured. An accuracy of 99.996% and an RMSE of 0.02864 were achieved with the SVM classification and regression model. The recognition time in detecting pork adulteration in beef with SVM models is 40 s. With the proposed SE-Nose methodology, the recognition time is reduced by one-third. To validate the classification and regression models, a 10-fold cross-validation method was used.

Indexed as

Electronic NoseFood ContaminationAnimalsCattleHumansadulterationartificial neural networkbeefelectronic nosefoodporkqualitativequantitativesample slicing window protocolsupport vector machine

Identifiers

PMID36298140
PMCPMC9609363

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.