Advertisement

Erwerbs-Obstbau

, Volume 60, Issue 2, pp 153–160 | Cite as

Design of Neural Network Predictor for the Physical Properties of Almond Nuts

  • İkbal Eski
  • Bünyamin DemirEmail author
  • Feyza Gürbüz
  • Zeynel Abidin Kuş
  • Kadir Uğurtan Yilmaz
  • Mehmet Uzun
  • Sezai Ercişli
Original Article
  • 339 Downloads

Abstract

In this study, an adaptive neuro fuzzy interface system (ANFIS) based predictor was designed to predict the physical properties of four almond types. Measurements of the dimensions, length, width and thickness were carried out for one hundred randomly selected samples of each type. With using these three major perpendicular dimensions, some physical parameters such as projected area, arithmetic mean diameter, geometric mean diameter, sphericity, surface area, volume, shape index and aspect ratio were estimated. In in a various Artificial Neural Network (ANN) structures, ANFIS structure which has given the best results was selected. The parameters analytically estimated and those predicted were given in the form of figures. The root mean-squared error (RMSE) was found to be 0.0001 which is quite low. ANFIS approach has given a superior outcome in the prediction of the Physical Properties of Almond Nuts.

Keywords

Neural Network Almond nut Prediction Physical properties 

Design des neuronalen Netzes als Prädiktor für die physikalischen Eigenschaften von Mandeln

Schlüsselwörter

Neuronales Netz Mandel Prognose Physikalische Eigenschaften 

Notes

Conflict of interest

B. Demir, İ. Eski, F. Gürbüz, Z. Abidin Kuş, K. Uğurtan Yilmaz, M. Uzun and S. Ercişli declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Afonso Junior PC, Correa PC, Pinto FAC, Queiroz DM (2007) Aerodynamic properties of coffee cherries and beans. Biosyst Eng 98:39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aktas T, Polat R, Atay U (2007) Comparison of mechanical properties of some selected almond cultivars with hard and soft shell under compression loading. J Food Process Eng 30:773–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arslan S, Vursavus KK (2008) Physico-mechanical properties of almond nut and its kernel as a function of variety and moisture content. Philipp Agric Sci 91:171–179Google Scholar
  4. Ayoubi S, Shahri AP, Karchegani PM, Sahrawat KL (2011) Application of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) to predict soil organic matter using remote sensing data in two ecosystems. In: Atazadeh I (ed) Biomass and remote sensing of biomass, pp 181–196Google Scholar
  5. Bachir O, Zoubir AF (2012) Adaptive Neuro-fuzzy inference system based control of Puma 600 robot manipulator. Int J Electr Comput Eng 2:90–97Google Scholar
  6. Bala BK, Ashraf MA, Uddin MA, Janjai S (2005) Experimental and neural network prediction of the performance of a solar tunnel drier for drying jackfruit bulbs and leather. J Food Process Eng 28:552–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diamantopoulou MJ (2005) Artificial neural networks as an alternative tool in pine bark volume estimation. Comput Electron Agric 48:235–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dousti A, Ghazavi MA, Maleki A (2013) Grading of empty walnut using signal processing and artificial neural network techniques. Int J Agric Crop Sci 6:1072Google Scholar
  9. FAO (2012) FAO web page. www.fao.org. Accessed 10.11.2016Google Scholar
  10. Goyal S (2013) Artificial neural networks in vegetables: a comprehensive review. Sci J Crop Sci 2:75–94Google Scholar
  11. Karimi H, Navid H, Mahmoudi A (2012) Detection of damaged seeds in laboratory evaluation of precision planter using impact acoustics and artificial neural networks. J Artif Intell Res 1:67Google Scholar
  12. Kester DE, Gradziel TM (1996) Almonds. Fruit breeding. In: Janick J, Moore JN (eds) vol III. Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, pp 1–240. ISBN 978-0471126690Google Scholar
  13. Khalesi S, Mahmoudi A, Hosainpour A, Alipour A (2012) Detection of walnut varieties using impact acoustics and artificial neural networks (ANNs). Mod Appl Sci 6:43Google Scholar
  14. Khalifa S, Komarizadeh MH, Tousi B, Nikbakht AM (2011) An intelligent system for grading walnuts based on acoustic emission and neural networks. J Food Agric Environ 9:109–112Google Scholar
  15. Konečný V, Trenz O, Svobodová E (2010) Classification of companies with the assistance of self-learning neural networks. Agric Econ 56:51–58Google Scholar
  16. Mahmood M, Mojtaba T, Javad K, Narjes M (2008) Modeling some mechanical properties distributions of almond using weibull function. 18th National Congress on Food Technology, Iran, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  17. Mahmoodi-Eshkaftaki M, Ebrahimi R, Torki-Harchegani M (2013) Determination of critical conditions for puncturing almonds using coupled response surface methodology and genetic algorithm. Food Technol Biotechnol 51:500–508Google Scholar
  18. Mancuso S, Ferrini F, Nicese FP (1999) Chestnut (Castanea sativa mill.) genotype identification: an artificial neural network approach. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 74:777–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McCabe WL, Smith JC, Harriot P (1986) Unit operations of chemical engineering. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Mirzabe AH, Khazaei J, Chegini GR, Gholami O (2013) Some physical properties of almond nut and kernel and modeling dimensional properties. Agric Eng Int 15:256–265Google Scholar
  21. Mohsenin NN (1986) Physical properties of plant and animal materials. Gordon & Breach Science, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Movagharnejad K, Nikzad M (2007) Modeling of tomato drying using artificial neural network. Comput Electron Agric 59:78–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mpotokwane SM, Gaditlhatlhelwe E, Sebaka A, Jideani VA (2008) Physical properties of bambara groundnuts from Botswana. J Food Eng 89:93–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Reshadsedghi A, Mahmoudi A (2013) Detection of almond varieties using impact acoustics and artificial neural networks. Int J Agric Crop Sci 6:1008Google Scholar
  25. Reshadsedghi A, Mahmoudi A, Azimirad V, Hajilou J, Ghaffari H (2014) Non-destructive detection of unshelled almonds quality based on their kernel percentage using impact-acoustics and ANN’s techniques. Agric Sci Dev 3:360–365Google Scholar
  26. Rugini E, Monastra F (2003) Temperate fruits. In: Mitra SK, Rathora DS, Bose TK (eds) vol II. Display Printers, India, pp 344–414. ISBN 978-8190017114Google Scholar
  27. Sayinci B, Ercişli S, Akbulut M, Şavşatli Y, Baykal H (2015) Determination of shape in fruits of cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus) accessions by usıng elliptic fourier analysis. Acta Sci Pol Hortorum Cultus 14:63–82Google Scholar
  28. Soylu A (2003) Ilıman iklim Meyveleri II. Ders Notları No: 72. Uludağ Üniversitesi Zir. Fak., Bursa, pp 204–220Google Scholar
  29. Svoboda E (2007) Knowledge-management in managerial work of business management. Agric Econ 53:298–303Google Scholar
  30. Šťastný J, Konečný V, Trenz O (2011) Agricultural data prediction by means of neural network. Agric Econ 57:356–361Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • İkbal Eski
    • 1
  • Bünyamin Demir
    • 2
    Email author
  • Feyza Gürbüz
    • 3
  • Zeynel Abidin Kuş
    • 4
  • Kadir Uğurtan Yilmaz
    • 5
  • Mehmet Uzun
    • 6
  • Sezai Ercişli
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of ErciyesKayseriTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical and Metal Technologies, Vocational School of Technical SciencesUniversity of MersinMersinTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of ErciyesKayseriTurkey
  4. 4.Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of ErciyesKayseriTurkey
  5. 5.Department of Horticulture, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of ErciyesKayseriTurkey
  6. 6.Pistachio Research InstituteGaziantepTurkey
  7. 7.Department of Horticulture, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of AtatürkErzurumTurkey

Personalised recommendations