| Literature DB >> 36210468 |
Li Wang1, Qile Hu1, Lu Wang1, Huangwei Shi1, Changhua Lai2, Shuai Zhang3.
Abstract
Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36210468 PMCID: PMC9548111 DOI: 10.1186/s40104-022-00778-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anim Sci Biotechnol ISSN: 1674-9782
Fig. 2The response of ADG on different SID Lys intake (a) and NE intake (b). The curves were generated by the best fitted MR models in training. Only SID Lys intake and SID Lys intake2 were considered as input variables in Fig. 2a while other variables were neglected. Only NE intake and NE intake2 were considered as input variables in Fig. 2b
Fig. 3The structure of the best-fitted artificial neural networks in predicting ADG (a) and F/G (b). H1 was the value in the 1st node in the hidden layer; I1 was the 1st input; am was the bias; O1 was the value of the 1st output variable; H1 was the value of the 1st node; b was the bias; F was the activation function