Szanowni Państwo, w związku z bardzo dużą ilością zgłoszeń, rejestracją danych w dwóch systemach bibliograficznych, a jednocześnie zmniejszonym zespołem redakcyjnym proces rejestracji i redakcji opisów publikacji jest wydłużony. Bardzo przepraszamy za wszelkie niedogodności i dziękujemy za Państwa wyrozumiałość.
Repository logoRepository logoRepository logoRepository logo
Repository logoRepository logoRepository logoRepository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • Research Outputs
  • Employees
  • AAAHigh contrastHigh contrast
    EN PL
    • Log In
      Have you forgotten your password?
AAAHigh contrastHigh contrast
EN PL
  • Log In
    Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Bibliografia UPP
  3. Bibliografia UPP
  4. Machine Learning in Sensory Analysis of Mead—A Case Study: Ensembles of Classifiers
 
Full item page
Options

Machine Learning in Sensory Analysis of Mead—A Case Study: Ensembles of Classifiers

Type
Journal article
Language
English
Date issued
2025
Author
Przybył, Krzysztof 
Cicha-Wojciechowicz Daria
Drabińska, Natalia 
Majcher, Małgorzata Anna 
Faculty
Wydział Nauk o Żywności i Żywieniu
PBN discipline
food and nutrition technology
Journal
Molecules
ISSN
1420-3049
DOI
10.3390/molecules30153199
Web address
https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/30/15/3199
Volume
30
Number
15
Pages from-to
art. 3199
Abstract (EN)
The aim was to explore using machine learning (including cluster mapping and k-means methods) to classify types of mead based on sensory analysis and aromatic compounds. Machine learning is a modern tool that helps with detailed analysis, especially because verifying aromatic compounds is challenging. In the first stage, a cluster map analysis was conducted, allowing for the exploratory identification of the most characteristic features of mead. Based on this, k-means clustering was performed to evaluate how well the identified sensory features align with logically consistent groups of observations. In the next stage, experiments were carried out to classify the type of mead using algorithms such as Random Forest (RF), adaptive boosting (AdaBoost), Bootstrap aggregation (Bagging), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Decision Tree (DT). The analysis revealed that the RF and KNN algorithms were the most effective in classifying mead based on sensory characteristics, achieving the highest accuracy. In contrast, the AdaBoost algorithm consistently produced the lowest accuracy results. However, the Decision Tree algorithm achieved the highest accuracy value (0.909), demonstrating its potential for precise classification based on aroma characteristics. The error matrix analysis also indicated that acacia mead was easier for the algorithms to identify than tilia or buckwheat mead. The results show the potential of combining an exploratory approach (cluster map with the k-means method) with machine learning. It is also important to focus on selecting and optimizing classification models used in practice because, as the results so far indicate, choosing the right algorithm greatly affects the success of mead identification.
Keywords (EN)
  • machine learning

  • ensembles of classifiers

  • mead aroma

  • sensory analysis

  • odor-active compounds

License
cc-bycc-by CC-BY - Attribution
Open access date
July 30, 2025
Fundusze Europejskie
  • About repository
  • Contact
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies

Copyright 2025 Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy w Poznaniu

DSpace Software provided by PCG Academia