Foodie fooderson a conversational agent for the smart kitchen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conversational agents aim to offer an alternative to traditional methods for humans to engage with technology. This can mean reducing the effort to complete a task using reasoning capabilities and by exploiting context, or allow voice interaction when traditional methods are not available or inconvenient. This paper introduces Foodie Fooderson, a conversational kitchen assistant built using IBM Watson technology. Foodie minimizes food wastage by optimizing the use of groceries and assist families in improving their eating habits through recipe recommendations taking into account personal context, such as allergies and dietary goals, while helping reduce food waste and managing grocery budgets. This paper discusses Foodie's architecture, use and benefits. Foodie uses services from CAPRecipes---our context-aware personalized recipe recommender system, SmarterContext---our personal context management system, and selected publicly available nutrition databases. Foodie reasons using IBM Watson's conversational services to recognize users' intents and understand events related to the users and their context. We also discuss our experiences in building conversational agents with Watson, including desired features that may improve the development experience with Watson for creating rich conversations in this exciting era of cognitive computing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".