Claim · model-written summary
The four reported prediction errors were 4.598, 8.657, 0.4586 and 5.106, but the abstract garbles their constituent mapping.
- Taxon
- rhubarb
Rheum rhabarbarume0 - Outcome
- RMSEPse1
- Value
- 4.598, 8.657, 0.4586, and 5.106e1
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Schema note from the model: Constituent mapping is unclear due to missing words.
Verbatim
e0“Near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and artificial neural networks were used for the quantitative prediction of four active constituents in rhubarb”
e1“RMSEPs for the were 4.598, 8.657, 0.4586, and 5.106, respectively”
Title
Xiao-hui Yu; Zhuo-yong Zhang; Qun Ma; et al. PubMed 2007
Other claims from this paper (5)
- Method / resource The model cross-validation error for anthraquinones was 2.572.
- Method / resource The model cross-validation error for anthraquinone glucosides was 0.442.
- Method / resource The model cross-validation error for stilbene glucosides was 2.794.
- Method / resource The model cross-validation error for tannins and related compounds was 9.438.
- Method / resource The authors report that the method was fast and gave satisfactory results.