Refine

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics

More filters

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The best processing parameters for Arctium lappa were 300 ℃ drying temperature and 4-5 minutes processing time.

Taxon
Arctium LappaArctium lappae0
Outcome
best processing parameterse0
Value
300 ℃e0
Qualifier
4-5 minutes of processing timee0

Verbatim

e0

“the best processing parameters for Arctium Lappa consisted of 300 ℃ of the drying tempera-ture and 4-5 minutes of processing time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 332–461

Title

Processing for Arctium Lappa with orthogonal test

Jianxin Wang Zhongchengyao 2010

Other claims from this paper (1)
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The pH differential method had the shortest processing time.

Outcome
Processing time (incubation time)e0
Direction
loweste0
Comparator
pH differential methode0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Processing time (incubation time) was lowest in the pH differential method”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1221–1295
t0

“Strawberries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–93

Title

Anthocyanin Extraction Method and Sample Preparation Affect Anthocyanin Yield of Strawberries

Toktam Taghavi; Hiral Patel; Reza Rafie Natural Product Communications 2022. doi:10.1177/1934578x221099970

Other claims from this paper (7)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hand picking working time for processing tomato reached 142.4 hrs/10a.

Taxon
Processing Tomatot0
Outcome
working timee0
Value
142.4hrs/10ae0

Verbatim

t0

“Processing Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–74
e0

“working time has reached 142.4hrs/10a”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1243–1280

Title

Studies on the Development of a Mechanical Harvester for Processing Tomato

Hiroshi ARIMA Japanese Journal of Farm Work Research 1979. doi:10.4035/jsfwr.1979.36_1

Other claims from this paper (4)
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean image processing time was 0.17s.

Outcome
average processing timee0
Value
0.17se0

Verbatim

e0

“the average processing time is 0.17s”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 942–978
t0

“Ramie”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 38–43

Title

Navigation Line Extraction Method for Ramie Combine Harvester Based on U-Net

Zhengwei Chen; Runxin Niu; Jie Wang; et al. 2021 6th Asia-Pacific Conference on Intelligent Robot Systems (ACIRS) 2021. doi:10.1109/acirs52449.2021.9519315

Other claims from this paper (4)
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The segmentation approach has low inference time for near real-time processing.

Taxon
plant rootse1
Outcome
inference timee5
Qualifier
near real-time processinge5

Verbatim

e1

“generate realistic and high resolution images of plant roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 207–267
e5

“low inference time for near real-time processing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1083–1131

Title

Plant Root Phenotyping Using Deep Conditional GANs and Binary Semantic Segmentation

Vaishnavi Thesma; Javad Mohammadpour Velni Sensors 2022. doi:10.3390/s23010309

Other claims from this paper (5)
Method / resourceauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The described confocal data processing method reduced processing time.

Organ / stage
pollen and pistile1
Outcome
time needed for processing data in LCSMe0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedValue

Verbatim

e0

“the time needed for processing data in LCSM will be largely decreased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 210–279
e1

“with pollen and pistil of pear”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 164–194

Title

Technolog of data collection and analysis from Laser Confocal Scanning Microscope

Shaoling Zhang Guoshu xuebao 2005

Other claims from this paper (2)
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

YOLOv11 required less processing time than YOLOv10.

Taxon
Cropt0
Outcome
processing timee0
Direction
lesse0

Not reportedComparatorValue

Verbatim

t0

“Crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–33
e0

“YOLOv11 was more efficient, consuming less computational resources and processing time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1384–1470

Title

Deep Learning Approaches for Crop Disease Detection Using Yolov11 and Yolov10

Akansh Vishwakarma; Murugan A 2025 International Conference on Computing Technologies & Data Communication (ICCTDC) 2025. doi:10.1109/icctdc64446.2025.11158725

Other claims from this paper (4)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hand picking accounts for 52.2% of the total working time for processing tomato culture.

Taxon
Processing Tomatot0
Outcome
total working timee0
Value
52.2%e0

Verbatim

t0

“Processing Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–74
e0

“occupies 52.2% of total working time for processing tomato culture”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1285–1351

Title

Studies on the Development of a Mechanical Harvester for Processing Tomato

Hiroshi ARIMA Japanese Journal of Farm Work Research 1979. doi:10.4035/jsfwr.1979.36_1

Other claims from this paper (4)
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Image processing reduced processing time and significantly improved crop identification.

Outcome
time of action and enhanced the crop identificatione0
Direction
condensede0

Not reportedComparatorValue

Verbatim

e0

“The performance of image processing condensed the time of action and enhanced the crop identification significantly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1238–1353
t0

“Rice Granules”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 12–25

Title

Analysis of Rice Granules using Image Processing and Neural Network Pattern Recognition Tool

Abirami. S; Neelamegam. P; Kala. H. International Journal of Computer Applications 2014. doi:10.5120/16806-6530

Other claims from this paper (1)
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

FTIR distinguished Forsythis samples by processing time.

Taxon
Forsythis suspense(Thunb.)Vahle0
Outcome
different processing timee0
Comparator
different processing timee0

Verbatim

e0

“Forsythis suspense(Thunb.)Vahl can be distinguished by different processing methods and different processing time,according to the number,the shape and the relative intensity of the absorption peaks”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 669–867

Title

Identify Different Processing Methods of Forsythis suspense(Thunb.)Vahl by FTIR Spectrometry

Bao Li Chinese Journal of Spectroscopy Laboratory 2011

Other claims from this paper (3)

Lexical search (BM25). All words must match; if nothing does, any word. Organism names also match every spelling of the same organism. No semantic search yet.