Food is an integral part of our life and what and how much we eat crucially affects our health. Our food choices largely depend on how we perceive certain characteristics of food, such as whether it is healthy, delicious or if it qualifies as a salad. But these perceptions differ from person to person and one person's "single lettuce leaf" might be another person's "side salad". Studying how food is perceived in relation to what it actually is typically involves a laboratory setup. Here we propose to use recent advances in image recognition to tackle this problem. Concretely, we use data for 1.9 million images from Instagram from the US to look at systematic differences in how a machine would objectively label an image compared to how a human subjectively does. We show that this difference, which we call the "perception gap", relates to a number of health outcomes observed at the county level. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that image recognition is being used to study the "misalignment" of how people describe food images vs. what they actually depict.
In the work most similar to ours, @cite_30 use image annotations obtained by Imagga http: imagga.com auto-tagging-demo to explore the value of machine tags for modeling public health variation. They find that, generally, human annotations provide better signals. They do, however, report encouraging results for modeling alcohol abuse using machine annotations. Furthermore, due to their reliance on a third party system, they could only obtain annotations for a total of 200k images. Whereas our work focuses on the in how machines and humans annotate the same images, their main focus is on building models for public health monitoring.
@cite_30
2950919774
Several projects have shown the feasibility to use textual social media data to track public health concerns, such as temporal influenza patterns or geographical obesity patterns. In this paper, we look at whether geo-tagged images from Instagram also provide a viable data source. Especially for "lifestyle" diseases, such as obesity, drinking or smoking, images of social gatherings could provide information that is not necessarily shared in, say, tweets. In this study, we explore whether (i) tags provided by the users and (ii) annotations obtained via automatic image tagging are indeed valuable for studying public health. We find that both user-provided and machine-generated tags provide information that can be used to infer a county's health statistics. Whereas for most statistics user-provided tags are better features, for predicting excessive drinking machine-generated tags such as "liquid" and "glass" yield better models. This hints at the potential of using machine-generated tags to study substance abuse.