ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Advances in Sensing Techniques and Deep Learning for Food Quality Detection: Opportunities, Challenges, and Perspectives from Image Recognition to Multimodal Data Fusion.
Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Food quality and safety inspection increasingly requires advanced solutions because conventional methods are challenged by the complexity of modern food systems. Effective inspection must address product quality, authenticity, and safety, together with process-related risks arising during production, storage, transportation, and distribution. However, existing analytical approaches and deep learning studies often focus on individual food attributes or sensing modalities, providing limited guidance for selecting appropriate models and sensing strategies for specific inspection objectives. This review systematically compares CNNs, RNNs/LSTMs, Transformers, GNNs, GANs, and hybrid architectures, as well as transfer learning, self-supervised learning, contrastive learning, few-shot learning, lightweight networks, edge computing, and multimodal fusion. Beyond predictive performance, we evaluate dataset size and representativeness, sample- and batch-level validation, external validation, data-leakage risks, interpretability, computational requirements, and the maturity of food-specific evidence. The principal contribution is an application-oriented framework linking inspection objectives and food matrices with sensing modalities, model architectures, validation evidence, and deployment conditions. Although Transformer-, GNN-, GAN-, multimodal-, and few-shot-learning-based approaches show substantial potential, many remain at developing, emerging, or prototype stages in food-specific applications. For high-risk targets, including toxicants, allergens, adulterants, and foodborne pathogens, deep learning systems should primarily support rapid screening and decision-making, while safety-critical results require confirmation using validated reference methods. Overall, this review provides a systematic perspective on deep learning for food quality and safety inspection and identifies key priorities for future research and industrial deployment.
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.