MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005797892 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2973625

DeepFood: Food Image Analysis and Dietary Assessment via Deep Model

2020· article· en· W3005797892 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Artificial neural networkMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Food is essential for human life and has been the concern of many healthcare conventions. Nowadays new dietary assessment and nutrition analysis tools enable more opportunities to help people understand their daily eating habits, exploring nutrition patterns and maintain a healthy diet. In this paper, we develop a deep model based food recognition and dietary assessment system to study and analyze food items from daily meal images (e.g., captured by smartphone). Specifically, we propose a three-step algorithm to recognize multi-item (food) images by detecting candidate regions and using deep convolutional neural network (CNN) for object classification. The system first generates multiple region of proposals on input images by applying the Region Proposal Network (RPN) derived from Faster R-CNN model. It then indentifies each region of proposals by mapping them into feature maps, and classifies them into different food categories, as well as locating them in the original images. Finally, the system will analyze the nutritional ingredients based on the recognition results and generate a dietary assessment report by calculating the amount of calories, fat, carbohydrate and protein. In the evaluation, we conduct extensive experiments using two popular food image datasets - UEC-FOOD100 and UEC-FOOD256. We also generate a new type of dataset about food items based on FOOD101 with bounding. The model is evaluated through different evaluation metrics. The experimental results show that our system is able to recognize the food items accurately and generate the dietary assessment report efficiently, which will benefit the users with a clear insight of healthy dietary and guide their daily recipe to improve body health and wellness.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it