Chemosensory vocabulary in wine, perfume and food product reviews: Insights from language modeling

被引:1
作者
Horberg, Thomas [1 ]
Kurfali, Murathan [1 ]
Olofsson, Jonas K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Stockholm Univ, RISE Res Inst Sweden, Dept Psychol, Sensory Cognit Interact Lab, Albanovagen 12, S-11419 Stockholm, Sweden
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
Sensory vocabulary; Natural language processing; Semantic analysis; Cross-domain comparison; Consumer reviews; Machine learning; STANDARDIZED SYSTEM; FLAVOR; PLEASANTNESS; PERCEPTION; RATINGS; WORDS; TASTE;
D O I
10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105357
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
Chemosensory sensations are often hard to describe and quantify. Language models may facilitate a systematic understanding of sensory descriptions. We accessed consumer and expert reviews of wine, perfume, and food products (English language; about 68 million words in total) and analyzed their sensory descriptions. Using a novel data-driven method based on natural language data, we compared the three chemosensory vocabularies (wine, perfume, food) with respect to their vocabulary overlap and semantic properties, and explored their semantic spaces. The three vocabularies primarily differ with respect to domain specificity, concreteness, descriptor type preference and degree of gustatory vs. olfactory association. Wine vocabulary primarily distinguishes between white wine and red wine flavors and qualities. Food vocabulary separates drinkable and edible food products and ingredients, on the one hand, and savory and non-savory products, on the other. A salient distinction in all three vocabularies is between concrete and abstract/evaluative terms. Valence also plays a role in the semantic spaces of all three vocabularies, but valence is less prominent here than in general olfactory vocabulary. Our method allows a systematic comparison of sensory descriptors in the three product domains and provides a data-driven approach to derive sensory lexicons that can be applied by sensory scientists.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 66 条
[1]  
Agorastos G., 2020, Journal of Food Science Nutrition, P1, DOI [10.46715/jfsn2020.09.1000107, DOI 10.46715/JFSN2020.09.1000107]
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1985, ATLAS ODOR CHARACTER
[3]   Age of acquisition and imageability ratings for a large set of words, including verbs and function words [J].
Bird, H ;
Franklin, S ;
Howard, D .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUMENTS & COMPUTERS, 2001, 33 (01) :73-79
[4]   Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas [J].
Brysbaert, Marc ;
Warriner, Amy Beth ;
Kuperman, Victor .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2014, 46 (03) :904-911
[5]  
Budanitsky A., 2001, WORKSH WORDNET OTH L
[6]  
Caballero Rodriguez M. D. R., 2010, Human Cognitive Processing, V26, P265, DOI [10.1075/hcp.26.15cab, DOI 10.1075/HCP.26.15CAB]
[7]  
Canon F., 2022, Managing Wine Quality, P41, DOI [10.1016/B978-0-08-102067-8.00009-9, DOI 10.1016/B978-0-08-102067-8.00009-9]
[8]  
Chocolate Tasting Institute, 2023, Chocolate and Cacao Flavor Profile Map
[9]   Uncovering the language of wine experts [J].
Croijmans, Ilja ;
Hendrickx, Iris ;
Lefever, Els ;
Majid, Asifa ;
Van den Bosch, Antal .
NATURAL LANGUAGE ENGINEERING, 2020, 26 (05) :511-530
[10]   Not All Flavor Expertise Is Equal: The Language of Wine and Coffee Experts [J].
Croijmans, Ilja ;
Majid, Asifa .
PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (06)