Application of Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) in Drying Technology: A Comprehensive Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inspired by the functional behavior of the biological nervous system of the human brain, the artificial neural network (ANN) has found many applications as a superior tool to model complex, dynamic, highly nonlinear, and ill-defined scientific and engineering problems. For this reason, ANNs are employed extensively in drying applications because of their favorable characteristics, such as efficiency, generalization, and simplicity. This article presents a comprehensive review of numerous significant applications of the ANN technique to solve problems of nonlinear function approximation, pattern detection, data interpretation, optimization, simulation, diagnosis, control, data sorting, clustering, and noise reduction in drying technology. We summarize the use of the ANN approach in modeling various dehydration methods; e.g., batch convective thin-layer drying, fluidized bed drying, osmotic dehydration, osmotic-convective drying, infrared, microwave, infrared- and microwave-assisted drying processes, spray drying, freeze drying, rotary drying, renewable drying, deep bed drying, spout bed drying, industrial drying, and several miscellaneous applications. Generally, ANNs have been used in drying technology for modeling, predicting, and optimization of heat and mass transfer, thermodynamic performance parameters, and quality indicators as well as physiochemical properties of dried products. Moreover, a limited number of researchers have focused on control of drying systems to achieve desired product quality by online manipulating of the drying conditions using previously trained ANNs. Opportunities and limitations of the ANN technique for drying process simulation, optimization, and control are outlined to guide future R&D in this area.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".