
arXiv: 2504.06925
Automatic dietary assessment based on food images remains a challenge, requiring precise food detection, segmentation, and classification. Vision-Language Models (VLMs) offer new possibilities by integrating visual and textual reasoning. In this study, we evaluate six state-of-the-art VLMs (ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Moondream, DeepSeek, and LLaVA), analyzing their capabilities in food recognition at different levels. For the experimental framework, we introduce the FoodNExTDB, a unique food image database that contains 9,263 expert-labeled images across 10 categories (e.g., "protein source"), 62 subcategories (e.g., "poultry"), and 9 cooking styles (e.g., "grilled"). In total, FoodNExTDB includes 50k nutritional labels generated by seven experts who manually annotated all images in the database. Also, we propose a novel evaluation metric, Expert-Weighted Recall (EWR), that accounts for the inter-annotator variability. Results show that closed-source models outperform open-source ones, achieving over 90% EWR in recognizing food products in images containing a single product. Despite their potential, current VLMs face challenges in fine-grained food recognition, particularly in distinguishing subtle differences in cooking styles and visually similar food items, which limits their reliability for automatic dietary assessment. The FoodNExTDB database is publicly available at https://github.com/AI4Food/FoodNExtDB.
Accepted at IEEE/CVF Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference workshops 2025 (CVPRw) 10 pages, 4 figures, 2 tables
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI), Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV), Computer Science - Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI), Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV), Computer Science - Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
