MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4377967516 · doi:10.32920/23153375.v1

Leveraging from Artificial Intelligence (AI) In Advancing the Augmented Reality (AR) Grocery Shopping Experience

2023· preprint· en· W4377967516 on OpenAlexaff
Yasmeen Alhamdan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented realityComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkProcess (computing)Identification (biology)Product (mathematics)Selection (genetic algorithm)Grocery storeGrocery shoppingAssisted livingHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceAdvertisingBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally, people are extremely eager to save time and money while maintaining healthy life choices, especially when performing essential activities such as in-store grocery shopping. This paper presents a system that integrates Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods with Augmented Reality (AR) techniques to enhance the grocery shopping experience through the use of smart glasses. Our proposed framework deploys a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) object detection model that allows for item identification. By simultaneously retrieving data from a large nutrition database, personal medical reports, and other grocery store related datasets, our intelligent system is able to provide user-centric nutrition facts, health and wellness tips, and unhealthy selection warnings that are augmented on a real time broadcasting of the smart glasses. Our state-of-the-art framework (CoShopper) demonstrates high accuracy in detecting grocery items, improves product selection, increases cost efficiency, and reduces the time spent in the process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→