# The Use of Machine Learning for Comparative Analysis of
## 3 Results
### Comparison of Methods for Determining AOA  
For the first time, we conducted: a comparison of measurements of the mass concentration of phenolic substances simultaneously according to two standards: gallic acid and Trolox-C; a comparison of measurements of the antioxidant activity of white and red table wine materials by amperometric and chemiluminescent methods. Comparison of amperometric and chemiluminescent methods for determining the AOA of white and red table wine materials. Regression analysis was used to obtain a regression equation expressing the relationship between the indicators of antioxidant activity of white and red table wine materials determined by amperometric and chemiluminescent methods (Figure 1). \[\text{AOA}_{\text{ch}}=-1.2433\text{AOA}_{\text{am}}{}^{2}+2.2374\text{AOA}_{ \text{am}}+0.2367,\text{ R}^{2}=0.7827 \tag{6}\]  
where R\({}^{2}\) is the value of the reliability of the determination. In addition, a regression equation was obtained that expresses the relationship between the indicators of the antioxidant activity of red table wine materials, determined by amperometric and chemiluminescent methods (Figure 2). \[\text{AOA}_{\text{ch}}=37.653\text{AOA}_{\text{am}}{}^{2}-82.694\text{AOA}_{ \text{am}}+53.451,\text{ R}^{2}=0.9714, \tag{7}\]  
where R\({}^{2}\) is the value of the reliability of the determination. \[\text{AOA}_{\text{ch}}=8.3131\text{AOA}_{\text{am}}{}^{2}-3.9543\text{AOA}_{ \text{am}}+1.0251,\text{ R}^{2}=0.9801, \tag{8}\] \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**M**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Name of Wine Materials**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mass Concentration of**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mass Concentration of**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**AOA\({}_{\text{am}}\)\({}^{1}\)**,**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**AOA\({}_{\text{ch}}\)\({}^{2}\)**,**} \\  & & & & & & \\ \cline{3-6}  & & & & & & \\ \hline
1 & Aligote 1 & 0.293 & 1.099 & 0.472 & 1.050 \\
2 & Aligote 2 & 0.259 & 0.974 & 0.350 & 0.891 \\
3 & Aligote 3 & 0.217 & 0.810 & 0.236 & 0.832 \\
4 & Varietal sherry wine material & 0.290 & 1.087 & 0.265 & 0.563 \\
5 & Rhine Riesling & 0.369 & 1.384 & 0.604 & 1.120 \\
6 & Rkatsieli & 0.440 & 1.650 & 0.663 & 1.173 \\
7 & Cabernet Sauvignon 1 & 2.520 & 9.450 & 1.245 & 8.986 \\
8 & Cabernet Sauvignon 2 & 2.890 & 10.841 & 1.330 & 10.345 \\
9 & Cabernet Sauvignon 3 & 2.315 & 8.682 & 1.200 & 8.153 \\
10 & Cabernet Sauvignon 4 & 2.249 & 8.435 & 1.082 & 8.134 \\
11 & Bastardo Magarachsky & 2.441 & 9.159 & 1.227 & 8.655 \\
12 & Merlot & 3.110 & 11.662 & 1.387 & 11.022 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* AOA\({}_{\text{am}}\)--AOA values measured by the amperometric method, g/dm\({}^{3}\). \({}^{2}\) AOA\({}_{\text{ch}}\)--AOA values measured by the chemiluminescent method, g/dm\({}^{3}\).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Summary table of indicators of the mass concentration of phenolic substances and antioxidant activity. where R\({}^{2}\) is the value of the reliability of the determination. The performed regression analysis showed the presence of a high degree of correlation between the AOA indicators of table wine materials, determined by amperometric and chemiluminescent methods. The determination value for white table wine materials was 0.7827, for red wine materials--0.9714. The joint determination of the coefficient of determination of the indicators of AOA\({}_{\text{am}}\) and AOA\({}_{\text{ch}}\) of white and red table wine materials amounted to 0.9801. Comparison of the mass concentration indicator of phenolic substances, determined by the photocolorimetric method using gallic acid and Trolox-C as standards, showed that there is a mathematical relationship between these indicators, which is expressed in the coefficient of recalculation of these values, which amounted to 3.75. Thus, knowing the mass concentration of phenolic substances in gallic acid, it is possible to calculate the value of this indicator for Trolox-C, multiplying it by 3.75 and vice versa.