What Constitutes Food Similarity? Visual Representations and Retrieval in Indian Cuisine
Organizations: Ashoka University, India · Institute for Future Health, UC Irvine, USA
Abstract
Food similarity underlies retrieval, recommendation, substitution, and other food computing tasks, yet food representations are typically evaluated by identity preservation. We ask what happens to food similarity beyond identity: how different visual representations organize foods into relational neighborhoods, what culinary relationships these neighborhoods reveal or obscure, and how consistently these structures emerge across representations. Indian cuisine provides a challenging setting in which visually similar foods may have different culinary identities, while foods within a culinary family can vary substantially in appearance. Using an expanded Khana dataset and seven pretrained visual representations spanning convolutional, transformer-based, self-supervised, and image-text aligned models, we evaluate image-to-image retrieval and image-to-dish neighborhoods, examining culinary-family structure, contrast cases, and cross-representation agreement. We also aggregate image representations to compare dish-level visual similarity across models and against recipe-derived similarity for the same dishes. Image-level neighborhoods vary substantially across representations, including similarities across culinary-family boundaries. At the dish level, aggregation reveals common visual structure despite local variation, but this structure corresponds less strongly with recipe-derived similarity. These findings show that recognition performance alone cannot characterize relational structure: food similarity depends on representation, modality, and abstraction level rather than being a fixed property of the food collection. Understanding these structures is therefore a prerequisite to combining multiple food information modalities into a coherent notion of similarity.
Figures & tables
| Image-to-Image Retrieval | Image-to-Dish Neighborhood | Contrast Cases | |||||||
| Model | Precision | Recall | MRR | Family | Cross-family | RW-family | Case A | Case B | Case C |
| ResNet-152 | 0.258 | 0.0078 | 0.509 | 0.150 | 0.850 | 0.166 | 0.766 | 0.000017 | 0.145 |
| EfficientNet-V2-S | 0.277 | 0.0082 | 0.524 | 0.158 | 0.842 | 0.176 | 0.705 | 0.000006 | 0.148 |
| ConvNeXt-Small | 0.305 | 0.0092 | 0.556 | 0.164 | 0.836 | 0.184 | 0.727 | 0.000 | 0.157 |
| ViT-B/16 | 0.282 | 0.0083 | 0.527 | 0.157 | 0.843 | 0.176 | 0.717 | 0.000004 | 0.149 |
| DINOv2 | 0.429 | 0.0136 | 0.643 | 0.215 | 0.785 | 0.241 | 0.740 | 0.000 | 0.204 |
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Visual Representation Learning
Visual representation learning develops image and video features that capture useful structure for recognition, retrieval, spatial reasoning, and action.
See all 227 papers