ArticleScientific reports2026
Ensemble machine learning with Bayesian optimization predicts bioactive extraction from fermented watermelon rind using natural deep eutectic solvents.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A new integrated extraction strategy was established by combining natural solvent systems (NADES), microwave-assisted extraction, and machine learning techniques for optimizing the extraction of bioactive compounds from fermented watermelon rind. The results showed that solid-state fermentation significantly improved extraction rates, compared to non-fermented controls. The fermentation pretreatment comparison was conducted under identical extraction conditions, with non-fermented watermelon rind serving as the internal control. Machine learning models optimized using Bayesian optimization were developed to describe and predict three important response variables: TPC, TFC, and antioxidant activity, as functions of four extraction variables (microwave power, temperature, time, and solid-liquid ratio). The ensemble models showed outstanding predictive capabilities with test R² values of 0.9147, 0.9088, and 0.9252 for TFC, TPC, and DPPH activity, respectively, with very low overfitting (ΔR² < 0.06). Importance analysis of the features showed temperature as the most important parameter in the extraction of bioactive compounds (importance: 0.842-0.885), followed by solid-liquid ratio. Simultaneous optimization using the validated models showed the optimal extraction conditions to be 62.5 °C, 27.7 min, 300 W, and 30 mg/mL, predicting values of 1.656 mg CE/g (TFC), 19.80 mg GAE/g (TPC), and 71.27% (DPPH activity). Solid-state fermentation enhanced extraction yields, increasing total phenolics (16.9 to 19.1 mg GAE/g), flavonoids (0.61 to 0.74 mg CE/g), and DPPH activity (66% to 75%). The developed ensemble models showed high accuracy (R² = 0.91-0.93; RMSE = 0.0812 mg/g, 0.51 mg/g, and 0.74%). Experimental validation results have confirmed the high accuracy of the model with relative errors of less than 3% for all responses. The combination of fermentation pretreatment, green extraction, and machine learning indicates promise for sustainable valorization of agricultural waste resources as sources of bioactive compounds for nutraceutical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.