| Literature DB >> 25330048 |
Abstract
In order to assure the consistency of the final product quality, a fast and effective process monitoring is a growing need in solid state fermentation (SSF) industry. This work investigated the potential of non-invasive techniques combined with the chemometrics method, to monitor time-related changes that occur during SSF process of feed protein. Four fermentation trials conducted were monitored by an electronic nose device and a near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) spectrometer. Firstly, principal component analysis (PCA) and independent component analysis (ICA) were respectively applied to the feature extraction and information fusion. Then, the BP_AdaBoost algorithm was used to develop the fused model for monitoring of the critical time in SSF process of feed protein. Experimental results showed that the identified results of the fusion model are much better than those of the single technique model both in the training and validation sets, and the complexity of the fusion model was also less than that of the single technique model. The overall results demonstrate that it has a high potential in online monitoring of the critical moment in SSF process by use of integrating electronic nose and NIRS techniques, and data fusion from multi-technique could significantly improve the monitoring performance of SSF process.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25330048 PMCID: PMC4239914 DOI: 10.3390/s141019441
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Score cluster plot with the top three principal components (PCs) from all samples. Score cluster obtained from (a) electronic nose data and (b) near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) data.
Figure 2.Identification rates of the identified model with a different number of PCs in training and validation sets. Results obtained from (a) electronic nose data and (b) NIRS data.
Figure 3.The structure of the intermediate-level fusion for monitoring of SSF of feed protein.
Figure 4.Identification rates of the fused model with a different number of ICs in training and validation sets.
Detail identification results of the best fusion model in the training and validation sets.
|
| ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training set | 15 | day 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
| 15 | day 1 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 15 | day 2 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 15 | day 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 15 | day 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 15 | day 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 100 | |
| 15 | day 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 14 | 93.33 | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Validation set | 5 | day 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
| 5 | day 1 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 5 | day 2 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 5 | day 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 5 | day 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| 5 | day 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 100 | |
| 5 | day 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 60 | |
Results and comparison of the best BP_AdaBoost models based on different techniques.
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| NIRS | 6 | 96/105 | 91.43 | 30/35 | 85.71 |
| Electronic nose | 7 | 101/105 | 96.19 | 32/35 | 91.43 |
| Fusion | 4 | 104/105 | 99.05 | 33/35 | 94.29 |