Toward intelligent food drying: Integrating artificial intelligence into drying systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) and its data-driven counterpart, machine learning (ML), are rapidly evolving disciplines with increasing applications in modeling, simulation, control, and optimization within the drying industry. This paper presents a comprehensive overview of progress made in ML from shallow to deep learning and its implications for food drying. Theoretical foundations, advantages, and limitations of various ML approaches employed in this domain are explored. Additionally, advancements in ML models, particularly those enhanced by optimization algorithms, are reviewed. The review underscores the role of intelligent configuration of ML models, which affects their accuracy and ability to solve problems of high energy consumption, nutrient degradation, and uneven drying. Drawing upon research achievements, integrating of AI models with real-time measuring methods is discussed, enabling dynamic determination of optimal drying conditions and parameter adjustments. This integration facilitates automated decision-making, reducing human errors and enhancing operational efficiency in food drying. Moreover, AI models demonstrate proficiency in predicting drying times and analyzing energy usage patterns, thereby enabling optimization to minimize resource consumption while preserving product quality. Finally, this paper identifies current obstacles in technology development and proposes novel research avenues for sustainable drying technologies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".