Sun, Y., Zhang, M., Bhandari, B., & Yang, P. (2019).
Intelligent detection of flavor changes in ginger during microwave
vacuum drying based on LF-NMR. Food Research International, 119,
417-425.
Sun,
Y., Zhang, M., Mujumdar, A. S., & Yu, D. (2020). Pulse-spouted
microwave freeze drying of raspberry: Control of moisture using ANN
model aided by LF-NMR. Journal of Food Engineering, 110354.
30. The author need to explain this
part in more details. These lines are not clear. Does the
3-10-1 describes
the
topology of the hidden layer or
the
topology of the neural network as a whole? What was the reason to use
the
Levenberg-Marquardt
algorithm? Isn’t this algorithm
implemented by the
trainlm
function in matlab?
[Response] Thanks for your comments. The 3-10-1 describes
the topology of the neural network as a
whole, the neuron number
of input layer, hidden layer, and output layer was 3, 10, and 1,
respectively. The trainlm is the Levenberg-Marquardt backpropagation.
Algorithm is the basis of neural network technology, which directly
determines the generalization ability of network model, nonlinear
mapping ability, fitting precision and efficiency, etc.
Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm is the fastest algorithm proposed for
medium-sized networks. In the pre-experiment, we studied the effects of
different algorithms on the model of French fries by training time, MSE
and R of training, validation, testing, and overall data. The results
showed that the best performing algorithm was Levenberg-Marquardt.
31. How did the author reach this conclusion? Is there any reference
that says an R2>0.863 is an indicator of good prediction
ability?! In addition, a testing set should be generated using a new set
of oil and potatoes. My understanding is that the author divided the
data that was collected in the same experiment to 3 sets. That is not
how external validation is
conducted.
[Response] Thanks for your comments. We have revised the
description in the Manuscript. The results showed that the R2 of the
validation set of TPC, TGP, THP, AV, PV were >0.930 and
>0.940, respectively, indicating that the prediction
ability of the model was available (table
1) ,numerous studies revealed
that the R2 higher than 0.9 in the model indicated
excellent classification performance as well as prediction ability
(Cavanna, Righetti, Elliott, & Suman, 2018). However, R2 of the testing
set of OTG was only 0.863, which is not good owing to the fluctuation of
OTG with frying time. In addition, we have added the external validation
in the Manuscript. Line 239-245
32.Again, what tools or model indicators did the author use to reach
this conclusion?