## 3 Results
### Mathematical Modeling  
Mathematical modeling is one of the tools used for describing the drying process of fruits and vegetables [28,29]. Different models exhibit potential both in predicting and explaining factors influencing drying. Statistical analysis (Table 3) showed that all applied models can be used for predicting changes in moisture ratio during drying. Generally, the best-fitting model was proposed by [PERSON] et al. [20]. Values of the coefficient of determination (R\({}^{2}\)) were between 0.999 and 0.997, root mean square error (RMSE) was between 0.0018 and 0.0170, and reduced mean chi-squared statistic (\(\chi^{2}\)) was between \(1.82\times 10^{-6}\) and \(1.37\times 10^{-4}\). In the current study, the highest values of the effective water diffusion coefficient (D\({}_{\text{eff}}\)) were stated for CD dried Weiki at 70 \({}^{\circ}\)C and was equal to \(9.589\times 10^{-10}\) m\({}^{2}\)/s (Table 4). In turn, the lowest D\({}_{\text{eff}}\) values were obtained for the fruits dried at 50\({}^{\circ}\)C and they were equal to \(3.093\times 10^{-10}\) and \(3.113\times 10^{-10}\) m\({}^{2}\)/s for VD Geneva and CD Weiki, respectively. The differences between D\({}_{\text{eff}}\) values obtained using different drying methods were also observed by other authors. Figure 1: Moisture ratio (MR) kinetics of dried (**a**) Geneva using the convective method, (**b**) Geneva using the vacuum method, (**c**) Weiki using the convective method, and (**d**) Weiki using the vacuum method. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Drying Method and Temperature**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\mathbf{D_{eff}\ (10^{-10}\ \mathrm{m^{2}/s)}}\)} \\ \cline{2-5}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Geneva**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Weiki**} \\ \hline CD 50 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 4.016 \(\pm\) 0.003 \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\) & 3.113 \(\pm\) 0.003 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) \\ \hline CD 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 5.498 \(\pm\) 0.007 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) & 5.958 \(\pm\) 0.012 \({}^{\mathrm{j}}\) \\ \hline CD 70 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 7.702 \(\pm\) 0.011 \({}^{\mathrm{m}}\) & 9.589 \(\pm\) 0.024 \({}^{\mathrm{o}}\) \\ \hline CD 80–50 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 7.740 \(\pm\) 0.082 \({}^{\mathrm{m}}\) & 4.514 \(\pm\) 0.009 \({}^{\mathrm{e}}\) \\ \hline CD 80–60 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 8.055 \(\pm\) 0.076 \({}^{\mathrm{n}}\) & 5.435 \(\pm\) 0.037 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) \\ \hline VD 50 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 3.093 \(\pm\) 0.014 \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 4.013 \(\pm\) 0.028 \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\) \\ \hline VD 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 4.315 \(\pm\) 0.033 \({}^{\mathrm{d}}\) & 5.532 \(\pm\) 0.033 \({}^{\mathrm{h}}\) \\ \hline VD 70 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 6.665 \(\pm\) 0.065 \({}^{\mathrm{k}}\) & 6.900 \(\pm\) 0.047 \({}^{\mathrm{l}}\) \\ \hline VD 80–50 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 3.656 \(\pm\) 0.013 \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 4.847 \(\pm\) 0.015 \({}^{\mathrm{f}}\) \\ \hline VD 80–60 \({}^{\circ}\)C & 4.980 \(\pm\) 0.029 \({}^{\mathrm{g}}\) & 5.709 \(\pm\) 0.047 \({}^{\mathrm{i}}\) \\ \hline \end{tabular} CD, convective drying and VD, vacuum drying. The number adjacent to the drying method abbreviation signifies the applied temperature. Means within columns sharing the same superscript are not significantly different from each other (\(p<0.05\)).  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Effective water diffusion coefficient computed from simplified [PERSON]’s second law of diffusion.