The data and findings discussed here come from the cited paper and do not represent test results from VISPEK equipment.
Moisture screening of dried seaweed can start with portable near-infrared, but the model results need to be viewed together with the reference method and error unit. This study compares tree models with deep networks, and the samples cover different sea areas, enterprises and mining periods, providing material for understanding the performance of different modeling methods in the same task.
Summary
The study used the loss-in-weight moisture results of dry seaweed as a reference to collect portable diffuse reflectance spectra, compare tree models, convolutional networks and residual networks, and evaluate prediction uncertainty. Some models report good relative performance, but the moisture proportion scale of the error and the applicability of the reference standard still need to be reviewed, and cannot be directly generalized to ensure moisture detection for all processed seaweeds.
(AI-generated conceptual illustration for context; it is not data from the paper, a photograph of the research equipment, or a VISPEK product diagram.)
Why It Matters
The dry seaweed moisture model can provide assistance for batch uniformity inspection before packaging, and the model error must be expressed in the correct content scale.
Methods and Reference Measurements
Dried seaweed samples are referenced by a weight loss moisture meter; the portable VIAVI collects 900–1650 nm in diffuse reflectance mode, averages 100 times per spectrum at 25°C, performs periodic white-dark calibration and controls the probe distance to 3–10 mm. 300 training, 80 testing, comparing XGB, CNN and ResNet, GA/PLS assisted wave selection and interpretation, GPR used to evaluate uncertainty.
Wavelengths and Acquisition Parameters
| Band/parameter | Original meaning and usage instructions |
|---|---|
| 900–1650 nm | This study portable NIR range |
| 3.0 nm | Data sampling interval, not equal to effective bandwidth |
Key Findings
XGB reports R²=0.979 and RPD=4.849; RMSEP=0.004 needs to check the moisture proportion scale and cannot be written directly as 0.004 percentage points.
Limitations and Interpretation
The applicability and error units cited in the paper's moisture standards need to be reviewed; the model results are not a guarantee for all processed seaweeds.
Image copyright belongs to the paper’s original authors. License: CC BY 4.0.
Source Paper
Zhang W, Pan M, Wang P, Xue J, Zhou X, Sun W, Hu Y, Shen Z. (2024). Comparative Analysis of XGB, CNN, and ResNet Models for Predicting Moisture Content in Porphyra yezoensis Using Near-Infrared Spectroscopy. Foods (Basel, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13193023
Contact Us
Whether portable equipment can be used for similar detection needs to be evaluated based on samples and experimental conditions, and the specific effect still needs to be verified through actual testing. Welcome to contact VISPEK to exchange your sample and testing needs, jointly evaluate experimental plans, and explore the feasibility of using our company's equipment for actual measurement and verification.
- Email: contact@vispek.cn
- Website: https://www.vispek.cn
VISPEK products shown for illustration; these were not the devices used in the cited study.