## 3 Results and Discussion
### Optimum Conditions for Roasting
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Raw Materials** & **Responses** & **Quadratic Polynomial Model Equations** & **R2** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{AMPS} & Y1: Overall acceptance (score) & 7.8097 + 0.9016X2 \(-\) 0.9525X12 \(-\) 1.4762X22 \({}^{2}\) & 0.921 \\  & Y2: Hardness (g) & 471.5 + 63.588X1 + 28.777X2 + 79.759X12 + 46.134X2 \({}^{2}\) & 0.950 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{CSM} & Y1: Overall acceptance (score) & 8.07933 \(-\) 0.54590X2 \(-\) 0.76879X12 \(-\) 1.54254X22 \({}^{2}\) & 0.916 \\  & Y2: Hardness (g) & 508.67 + 63.44X1 + 121.91X2 \(-\) 49.13X12 + 47.90X22 \({}^{2}\) & 0.965 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Response surface model equations of AMPS and CSM. The optimum temperature and time of AMPS and CSM were 217.8 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 1.08 min and 296.1 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 1.53 min, respectively. These values were in the range \(-\)0.1964 to 0.2435 (Table 4). Moreover, centeral composite design results (Table 5) showed that the optimum practical temperature and time values for superheated steam roasting was 220 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 1 min for AMPS and 300 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 1.5 min for CSM. In this study, the roasting time for AMPS and CSM was faster than that reported by [PERSON] et al. [10] and [PERSON] et al. [11]. According to [PERSON] et al. [10], the superheated steam roasting time of AMPS was 4 min at 270 \({}^{\circ}\)C to achieve a good panelist-determined sensory evaluation score, which included color, odor, texture, flavor, and overall enjoyment. Moreover, [PERSON] et al. [11] proposed the optimum superheated steam roasting time for squid meat was 10 min at 240 \({}^{\circ}\)C, as evaluated by panelists based on sensory characteristics. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Raw** **Materials**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Independent**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Symbol**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Range Level**} \\ \cline{4-7}  & & & \(-\)**1.414** & \(-\)**1** & **0** & **+1** & **+1.414** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{AMPS} & Temperature (\({}^{\circ}\)C) & X\({}_{1}\) & 192 & 200 & 220 & 240 & 248 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Time (min) & \(X_{2}\) & 0.53 & 0.67 & 1.00 & 1.33 & 1.47 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{CSM} & Temperature (\({}^{\circ}\)C) & X\({}_{1}\) & 272 & 280 & 300 & 320 & 328 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Time (min) & \(X_{2}\) & 0.79 & 1.00 & 1.50 & 2.00 & 2.21 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Symbol, experimental range and values of the independent variables in the central composite design. Figure 1: Three-dimensional response surface plots of overall acceptance (**a**) and hardness (**b**) of AMPS and overall acceptance (**c**) and hardness (**d**) of CSM in a superheated steam roaster using RSM. The optimum conditions for roasting both AMPS and CSM indicated the best combination of independent and dependent variables. Furthermore, RSM has been effectively used to improve food products [39; 40]. Here, we showed RSM successfully optimized superheated steam conditions for efficient production of AMPS and CSM. Moreover, applying RSM to AMPS and CSM roasting resulted in high sensory evaluation values. Taken together, these results indicate the potential of RSM to optimize or choose operating conditions to achieve a particular set of objectives.