To balance ambition (i.e., the extent of the forward time interval), accuracy, and computational cost, y = 2 hours, and z = 0, 30, 60, or 120 minutes. These time interval values can be put into context by comparison to reaction duration which was between five and eight hours (300-480 minutes). The expected behaviour is the larger the value of z, the harder it is to predict product formation. A range of values were selected for z to allow an evaluation of the relationship between the MAE and z. Because of the greater challenge associated facing the second model, y was assigned a higher value than x. This meant sensor data over a longer duration of time was used in the second model. In this task, it is more important to be able to see the larger context of the reaction progress. Having two models was advantageous, as it allowed the assessment of what would have been the intermediate output when t3 = 0.