ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Unboxing Deep Learning Model of Food Delivery Service Reviews Using Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) Technique.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning for food flavor prediction and regulation: models, data integration, and future perspectives.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- Mapping EEG Metrics to Human Affective and Cognitive Models: An Interdisciplinary Scoping Review from a Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Salmon Consumption Behavior Prediction Based on Bayesian Optimization and Explainable Artificial Intelligence.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Application of Convolutional Neural Networks and Recurrent Neural Networks in Food Safety.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Polygenic Risk Score for Cardiovascular Diseases in Artificial Intelligence Paradigm: A Review.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Review
- A Feasibility Study of Diabetic Retinopathy Detection in Type II Diabetic Patients Based on Explainable Artificial Intelligence.Journal of medical systems · 2023Article
- Developing an ensemble machine learning model for early prediction of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury.iScience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The demand for food delivery services (FDSs) during the COVID-19 crisis has been fuelled by consumers who prefer to order meals online and have it delivered to their door than to wait at a restaurant. Since many restaurants moved online and joined FDSs such as Uber Eats, Menulog, and Deliveroo, customer reviews on internet platforms have become a valuable source of information about a company's performance. FDS organisations strive to collect customer complaints and effectively utilise the information to identify improvements needed to enhance customer satisfaction. However, only a few customer opinions are addressed because of the large amount of customer feedback data and lack of customer service consultants. Organisations can use artificial intelligence (AI) instead of relying on customer service experts and find solutions on their own to save money as opposed to reading each review. Based on the literature, deep learning (DL) methods have shown remarkable results in obtaining better accuracy when working with large datasets in other domains, but lack explainability in their model. Rapid research on explainable AI (XAI) to explain predictions made by opaque models looks promising but remains to be explored in the FDS domain. This study conducted a sentiment analysis by comparing simple and hybrid DL techniques (LSTM, Bi-LSTM, Bi-GRU-LSTM-CNN) in the FDS domain and explained the predictions using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME). The DL models were trained and tested on the customer review dataset extracted from the ProductReview website. Results showed that the LSTM, Bi-LSTM and Bi-GRU-LSTM-CNN models achieved an accuracy of 96.07%, 95.85% and 96.33%, respectively. The model should exhibit fewer false negatives because FDS organisations aim to identify and address each and every customer complaint. The LSTM model was chosen over the other two DL models, Bi-LSTM and Bi-GRU-LSTM-CNN, due to its lower rate of false negatives. XAI techniques, such as SHAP and LIME, revealed the feature contribution of the words used towards positive and negative sentiments, which were used to validate the model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.