Evaluation of green tea sensory quality via process characteristics and image information

•Green tea’s sensory quality can be predicted precisely through process parameters.•Image feature of finished green tea can accurately evaluate its sensory quality.•Comparison of the RBF and the BP-MLP accuracy of the model.•The RBF model displayed greater accuracy for the sensory quality. As the pr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFood and bioproducts processing Vol. 102; pp. 116 - 122
Main Authors Zhu, Hongkai, Ye, Yang, He, Huafeng, Dong, Chunwang
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Rugby Elsevier B.V 01.03.2017
Elsevier Science Ltd
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:•Green tea’s sensory quality can be predicted precisely through process parameters.•Image feature of finished green tea can accurately evaluate its sensory quality.•Comparison of the RBF and the BP-MLP accuracy of the model.•The RBF model displayed greater accuracy for the sensory quality. As the processing control and sensory evaluation of green tea are highly subjective and the tea industry is highly professionalized, it is desirable that to find a more objective way of evaluating the quality of tea is found. In this paper, two models were set up using the BP-MLP and RBF neural networks, a sensory quality prediction model, using eleven parameters measured during processing as variables, such as leaf temperature, moisture content, etc., and a sensory quality evaluation model using fourteen parameters related to green tea as variables, such as image information were set up. The overall results suggested that leaf temperature, moisture content measured during production could effectively predict the sensory quality of green tea, with parameters as image information of green tea able to effectively evaluate its sensory quality. Compared with the BP-MLP neural network, the RBF model displayed much greater accuracy as a prediction model, reducing the relative error from 0.204 to 0.006.
ISSN:0960-3085
1744-3571
DOI:10.1016/j.fbp.2016.12.004