Automated food intake tracking requires depth-refined semantic segmentation to rectify visual-volume discordance in long-term care homes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malnutrition is a multidomain problem affecting 54% of older adults in long-term care (LTC). Monitoring nutritional intake in LTC is laborious and subjective, limiting clinical inference capabilities. Recent advances in automatic image-based food estimation have not yet been evaluated in LTC settings. Here, we describe a fully automatic imaging system for quantifying food intake. We propose a novel deep convolutional encoder-decoder food network with depth-refinement (EDFN-D) using an RGB-D camera for quantifying a plate's remaining food volume relative to reference portions in whole and modified texture foods. We trained and validated the network on the pre-labelled UNIMIB2016 food dataset and tested on our two novel LTC-inspired plate datasets (689 plate images, 36 unique foods). EDFN-D performed comparably to depth-refined graph cut on IOU (0.879 vs. 0.887), with intake errors well below typical 50% (mean percent intake error: [Formula: see text]%). We identify how standard segmentation metrics are insufficient due to visual-volume discordance, and include volume disparity analysis to facilitate system trust. This system provides improved transparency, approximates human assessors with enhanced objectivity, accuracy, and precision while avoiding hefty semi-automatic method time requirements. This may help address short-comings currently limiting utility of automated early malnutrition detection in resource-constrained LTC and hospital settings.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".