ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Beef Traceability Between China and Argentina Based on Various Machine Learning Models.
Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Beef, as a nutrient-rich food, is widely favored by consumers. The production region significantly influences the nutritional value and quality of beef. However, current methods for tracing the origin of beef are still under development, necessitating effective approaches to ensure food safety and meet consumer demand for high-quality beef. This study aims to establish a classification model for beef origin prediction by analyzing elemental content and stable isotopes in beef samples from two countries. The concentrations of elements in beef were analyzed using ICP-MS and ICP-OES, while the stable carbon isotope ratio was determined using EA-IRMS. Machine learning algorithms were employed to construct classification prediction models. A total of 83 beef samples were analyzed for the concentrations of 52 elements and the stable carbon isotope ratio. The classification accuracy of the PLS-DA model built on these results was 98.8%, while the prediction accuracy was 94.12% for the convolutional neural network (CNN) and 82.35% for the Random Forest algorithm. The PLS-DA model demonstrated higher classification accuracy compared to CNN and Random Forest, with an explanatory power (R
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.