MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of model selection approach obtained by machine learning tools on predicting the volume reduction of plant-based dehydrated foods

2024· article· en· W4404815214 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Volume (thermodynamics)Reduction (mathematics)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceChemistryBiochemical engineeringMathematicsEngineeringThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has identified eight key factors—product type, initial moisture content, pretreatment method, drying technology, temperature, pressure, microwave power, and sample thickness—that influence the shrinkage coefficient in dehydrated foods. Despite this understanding, there is a lack of comprehensive studies exploring the effect of model selection on predicting shrinkage. This study aims to evaluate the impact of different artificial intelligence (AI) model selection approaches on the prediction accuracy of the shrinkage coefficient for dehydrated foods. Specifically, we compare the performance of three AI techniques: Extreme Learning Machine (ELM), Evolutionary Polynomial Regression (EPR), and Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH). Our findings provide valuable insights into the role of model selection in enhancing the predictive accuracy of AI-driven models for food dehydration processes. To achieve this, two model selection approaches were considered: 1) prioritizing higher accuracy and minimizing error, and 2) conducting a comprehensive evaluation of the overall performance of the input variables. The obtained results showed that product type, drying technology, and temperature were consistently involved in the most effective model combinations, underscoring their critical relevance in accurately estimating the shrinkage coefficient. However, the most accurate model involved five inputs (product, technology, temperature, initial moisture content, and pretreatment), was developed with ELM, and produced a correlation coefficient of 0.8713, a root mean square error of 0.0897, and a Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency of 0.7534. EPR and GMDH models had simpler structures than ELM but lower accuracy. An external validation of the models suggested that selecting input combinations according to a comprehensive assessment of the inputs’ global performances lead to models being more generalizable. Therefore, the model selection approach was found to be critical for predicting shrinkage. The developed models can be used for quick estimation of volume reduction in foods during drying and thus can help in process design and optimization for improved structural properties of dried products. • The method of selecting input combinations influences final model performance. • Product type, drying method, and temperature are critical factors for food shrinkage. • Model generalization can be improved after a thorough input performance assessment.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it