← All projects

PROJECT 034 / 102 · Food science

Repeated laboratory signature audit.

How often do identical laboratory signatures recur, and can their sensory scores disagree?

Focused analytical studyWine qualityExecuted notebook

THE RESULT

What the data shows

The largest computed metric is 4,328 for Single record; the smallest is 2,169 for Repeated with same score. Metric: source_rows (Source rows).

No batch identifiers are supplied; identical inputs need not be duplicate ingestion errors.

Repeated laboratory signature audit — chart from the computed study output
Computed study output. Full values and units are available in the results download.
Computed results · 2 of 2 rows. Values rounded for display; source units and raw column names are retained in the download.
signature classsignaturessource rows
Repeated with same score9922,169
Single record4,3284,328
Download the complete result table ↓

THE METHOD

From source to answer

Group exact predictor signatures and count score multiplicity without treating repeated rows as proven errors.

The Python source exposes this study’s transformations. The complete project download includes shared preparation and evaluation routines.

THE NEXT DECISION

What follows from the finding

Preserve input groups in evaluation and investigate the meaning of repeats before deduplicating.

Where the conclusion stops

Sensory scores are ordinal and concentrated in the middle. Producer and batch IDs are unavailable. Associations are not recipes for changing quality or evidence of market price.

Related studies may reuse observations or holdouts. These are historical analyses; associations and backtests do not demonstrate commercial impact. Further model tuning needs new, untouched evaluation data.