A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Artificial neural network and response surface methodology: a comparative analysis for optimizing rice straw pretreatment and saccharification. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • - The study compares artificial neural networks (ANN) and response surface methodology (RSM) as tools for optimizing the pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic rice straw.
  • - Performance evaluation using correlation coefficients and mean squared error showed that both methods effectively identified optimal conditions, with ANN slightly outperforming RSM in capturing non-linear behaviors of the processes.
  • - ANN achieved high correlation values after testing (up to 0.997) for enzymatic hydrolysis, whereas RSM provided very close results (0.9994), demonstrating their effectiveness in cellulose recovery and saccharification efficiency.

Article Abstract

The present study demonstrates a comparative analysis between the artificial neural network (ANN) and response surface methodology (RSM) as optimization tools for pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic rice straw. The efficacy for both the processes, that is, pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis was evaluated using correlation coefficient () & mean squared error (MSE). The values of obtained by ANN after training, validation, and testing were 1, 0.9005, and 0.997 for pretreatment and 0.962, 0.923, and 0.9941 for enzymatic saccharification, respectively. On the other hand, the values obtained with RSM were 0.9965 for cellulose recovery and 0.9994 for saccharification efficiency. Thus, ANN and RSM together successfully identify the substantial process conditions for rice straw pretreatment and enzymatic saccharification. The percentage of error for ANN and RSM were 0.009 and 0.01 for cellulose recovery and for 0.004 and 0.005 for saccharification efficiency, respectively, which showed the authority of ANN in exemplifying the non-linear behavior of the system.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10826068.2020.1737816DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rice straw
12
pretreatment enzymatic
12
artificial neural
8
neural network
8
response surface
8
surface methodology
8
comparative analysis
8
straw pretreatment
8
enzymatic hydrolysis
8
enzymatic saccharification
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!