Claim · model-written summary
XGB was comparable to PLS for DMCo on the portable device.
Not reportedTaxonMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentSetting
Verbatim
e0“XGB was comparable to PLS in select scenarios (e.g., StC with the benchtop: 0.88 vs. 0.89; DMCo with the portable: 0.92 vs. 0.95)”
Title
Paulo Henrique Ramos Guimarães; Massaine Bandeira e Sousa; Marcos de Souza Campos; et al. Journal of Food Science 2025. doi:10.1111/1750-3841.70704
Other claims from this paper (8)
- Method / resource PLS delivered highest predictive accuracy across traits and devices.
- Method / resource KNN slightly outperformed PLS for DMCg with the benchtop device.
- Method / resource XGB was comparable to PLS for StC on the benchtop device.
- Method / resource Processed samples produced higher model accuracy than fresh samples.
- Method / resource Portable NIR performed better with processed samples.
- Method / resource Portable NIR surpassed benchtop DMCg validation accuracy.
- Method / resource Portable NIR surpassed benchtop StC validation accuracy.
- Method / resource Processed sample preparation significantly improved model performance.