Three-Dimensional Printing Parameter Optimization for Salmon Gelatin Gels Using Artificial Neural Networks and Response Surface Methodology: Influence on Physicochemical and Digestibility Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to optimize the 3D printing parameters of salmon gelatin gels (SGG) using artificial neural networks with the genetic algorithm (ANN-GA) and response surface methodology (RSM). In addition, the influence of the optimal parameters obtained using the two different methodologies was evaluated for the physicochemical and digestibility properties of the printed SGG (PSGG). The ANN-GA had a better fit (R2 = 99.98%) with the experimental conditions of the 3D printing process than the RSM (R2 = 93.99%). The extrusion speed was the most influential parameter according to both methodologies. The optimal values of the printing parameters for the SGG were 0.70 mm for the nozzle diameter, 0.5 mm for the nozzle height, and 24 mm/s for the extrusion speed. Gel thermal properties showed that the optimal 3D printing conditions affected denaturation temperature and enthalpy, improving digestibility from 46.93% (SGG) to 51.52% (PSGG). The secondary gel structures showed that the β-turn structure was the most resistant to enzymatic hydrolysis, while the intermolecular β-sheet was the most labile. This study validated two optimization methodologies to achieve optimal 3D printing parameters of salmon gelatin gels, with improved physicochemical and digestibility properties for use as transporters to incorporate high value nutrients to the body.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".