Food proposal device, food proposal method, and program

Abstract

A food proposal device (100) comprises: a storage unit that has stored therein held food information including first-type information indicating the type of a first held food, start-date information indicating a holding start date, and number-of-storable-days information indicating the number of storable days, and proposal food information including second-type information indicating the type of food and proposal-date information indicating a proposal date on which a proposal food that is the food of the second-type information was proposed; a determination unit (140) that determines, on the basis of a first number of elapsed days from the holding start date indicated by the start-date information and the number of storable days indicated by the number-of-storable-days information, a proposal interval until the first held food is proposed next time; and a control unit (160) that, in the case when a second number of days elapsed since the proposal date indicated by the proposal-date information corresponding to the second-type information that is of the same type as the first held food is longer than the proposal interval, instructs the presentation of the first held food as a proposal candidate, and otherwise, does not instruct the presentation of the first held food as a proposal candidate.

Description

Food recommendation device, food recommendation method, and program

[0001] The present disclosure relates to a food recommendation device, a food recommendation method, and a program.

[0002] Patent Literature 1 discloses a technology that suggests one or more recipes that include ingredients owned by a user from among a plurality of recipes based on inventory information of ingredients owned by the user. This technology aims to reduce food waste by suggesting recipes that prioritize ingredients that have been purchased recently or whose expiration date is approaching.

[0003] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2022-074812

[0004] The present disclosure provides a food recommendation device and the like that can encourage a user to consume food in a planned manner.

[0005] A food recommendation device according to one aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation device that suggests consumption of one or more held foods held by a user, and includes: a memory unit that stores held food information including first type information indicating a type of a first held food included in the one or more held foods, start date information indicating a holding start date of the first held food, and shelf life information indicating a shelf life of the first held food; second type information indicating a type of food; and first suggested food information including proposal date information indicating a proposal date on which a food of the second type information was proposed by the food recommendation device; a determination unit that determines a proposal interval until the next proposal of the first held food based on a first number of days elapsed since the holding start date indicated by the start date information and the shelf life indicated by the shelf life information; and a control unit that instructs the first held food to be presented as a proposal candidate when a second number of days elapsed since the proposal date indicated by proposal date information corresponding to second type information indicating the same type as the first held food is longer than the proposal interval, and does not instruct the first held food to be presented as the proposal candidate when the second number of days elapsed is shorter than the proposal interval.

[0006] Furthermore, a food recommendation method according to one aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation method using a food recommendation device that suggests consumption of one or more held foods held by a user, the method comprising: acquiring held food information including first type information indicating the type of a first held food included in the one or more held foods, start date information indicating the holding start date of the first held food, and shelf life information indicating the number of days the first held food can be stored; determining a proposal interval until the next proposal of the first held food based on a first number of days elapsed since the holding start date indicated by the start date information and the number of days the first held food can be stored indicated by the shelf life information; acquiring first suggested food information including second type information indicating the type of food and proposal date information indicating the proposal date on which the food of the second type information was proposed by the food recommendation device; if a second number of days elapsed since the proposal date indicated by proposal date information corresponding to second type information indicating the same type as the first held food is longer than the proposal interval, instructing the first held food to be presented as a proposal candidate; and if the second number of days elapsed is shorter than the proposal interval, not instructing the first held food to be presented as a proposal candidate.

[0007] These general or specific aspects may be realized by a device, an integrated circuit, a computer program, or a non-transitory recording medium such as a computer-readable CD-ROM, or by any combination of a device, an integrated circuit, a computer program, and a non-transitory recording medium.

[0008] The food recommendation device and the like in the present disclosure can encourage users to consume food in a planned manner.

[0009]

[0023] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an overview of a food recommendation device according to embodiment 1. FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the hardware configuration of the food recommendation device according to embodiment 1. FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the functional configuration of the food recommendation device according to embodiment 1. FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example of a shelf life DB. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of a held food DB. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of a UI for accepting input from a user regarding consumption of held foods. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of a UI for accepting input from a user regarding consumption of held foods. FIG. 8 is a graph illustrating the relationship between the first elapsed number of days and the food loss index for each shelf life. FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of a proposal interval determination table for determining a proposal interval based on the food loss index and the shelf life. FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a screen displayed on the display unit in response to a presentation instruction. FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating an example of a proposal reason according to the food loss index. FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating an example of a proposed food DB. FIG. 13 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a food registration process performed by the food recommendation device according to embodiment 1. FIG. 14 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a food recommendation process performed by the food recommendation device according to embodiment 1. Fig. 15 is a diagram illustrating an overview of a food recommendation device according to embodiment 2. Fig. 16 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the hardware configuration of a food recommendation device according to embodiment 2. Fig. 17 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the functional configuration of a food recommendation system according to embodiment 2. Fig. 18 is a diagram illustrating an example of a proposal interval determination table for determining a proposal interval based on the first number of elapsed days and the number of days that can be stored. Fig. 19 is a diagram illustrating another example of a screen displayed on the display unit in response to a presentation instruction.

[0010] (Knowledge underlying the present disclosure) It is known that shelf life of food varies depending on the type. Shelf life is, for example, the number of days from production until the expiration date when the food can be safely eaten. For example, the shelf life of root vegetables is longer than that of leafy vegetables. In this way, if a user owns both foods with long shelf life and foods with short shelf life, if recipes are suggested that prioritize ingredients purchased earlier or approaching their expiration date, as in Patent Document 1, recipes for both foods with long shelf life and foods with short shelf life will be suggested once their expiration dates are approaching. As a result, the frequency of suggestions for consumption of foods with long shelf life and foods with short shelf life differs. As a result, the consumption of foods with long shelf life is not planned, which may result in the user not consuming all of the foods.

[0011] In recent years, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been set as goals to be achieved by 2030 in order for humanity to continue living on Earth. The twelfth goal of the SDGs, "Responsible Consumption and Production," calls for reducing food waste, and consumer awareness of food waste in the home is on the rise.

[0012] Therefore, the inventors have come up with a food recommendation device etc. that can encourage users to consume food in a planned manner and contribute to the achievement of the SDGs.

[0013] a control unit that instructs the user to present the first held food as a candidate for proposal when the second number of elapsed days is shorter than the proposal interval; and a control unit that instructs the user to present the first held food as a candidate for proposal when the second number of elapsed days is shorter than the proposal interval.

[0014] According to this, the system determines the suggestion interval based on the first number of days elapsed since the food's possession start date and the food's shelf life, and determines whether to suggest food consumption to the user based on a comparison of the suggestion interval with the second number of days elapsed since the previous suggestion date. In this way, the system determines whether to suggest food consumption to the user taking into account the food's shelf life, thereby encouraging the user to plan their food consumption without making the user aware of the shelf life of each food item. This contributes to the achievement of the SDGs.

[0015] A food recommendation device according to a second aspect of the present disclosure is the food recommendation device according to the first aspect, wherein the determination unit determines the recommendation interval so that the longer the first elapsed number of days is, the shorter the recommendation interval becomes.

[0016] Therefore, the closer a food item is to the end of its shelf life (i.e., its expiration date), the more frequently the suggestion can be made, thereby encouraging the user to prioritize consumption of food items approaching their expiration date.

[0017] A food recommendation device according to a third aspect of the present disclosure is the food recommendation device according to the first or second aspect, wherein the determination unit determines the proposal interval so that the proposal interval becomes shorter as the shelf life becomes shorter.

[0018] This allows for a higher frequency of suggestions for foods that are approaching the end of their shelf life (i.e., their expiration date), thereby encouraging the user to consume those foods as a priority.

[0019] A food recommendation device according to a fourth aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation device according to any one of the first to third aspects, wherein the determination unit determines the recommendation interval for each type of the one or more held foods.

[0020] This allows the proposal interval to be changed for each of one or more types of food items held, so that held foods can be proposed at a proposal frequency appropriate for the type of food items held.

[0021] A food recommendation device according to a fifth aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation device according to any one of the first to fourth aspects, wherein the determination unit calculates a food waste index indicating the degree of deterioration of the first held food based on the first number of days elapsed and the number of days that can be stored, and determines the recommendation interval based on the food waste index and the number of days that can be stored.

[0022] This allows the degree of deterioration of stored food to be evaluated using the food waste index regardless of the number of days it can be stored, thereby simplifying the process for determining the suggested interval.

[0023] A food recommendation device according to a sixth aspect of the present disclosure is the food recommendation device according to the fifth aspect, wherein the one or more held foods include a first held food and a second held food, the determination unit calculates the food waste index for each of the one or more held foods, and the control unit, when a difference between the first food waste index of the first held food and the second food waste index of the second held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, instructs the presentation of the held food with the shorter shelf life, out of the first held food and the second held food, to be given priority.

[0024] Therefore, if the food waste indexes are similar, the user can be encouraged to prioritize consumption of the food item with the shortest shelf life.

[0025] A food recommendation device according to a seventh aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation device according to the fifth or sixth aspect, wherein the one or more held foods include a first held food and a second held food, the determination unit calculates the food waste index for each of the one or more held foods, and the control unit, when a difference between the first food waste index of the first held food and the second food waste index of the second held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, instructs the presentation of the held food with the larger held quantity out of the first held food and the second held food to be given priority.

[0026] Therefore, if the food loss indices are similar to each other, the user can be encouraged to prioritize consumption of the food item with the larger amount.

[0027] A food suggestion device according to an eighth aspect of the present disclosure is a food suggestion device according to any one of the fifth to seventh aspects, wherein the determination unit calculates the food loss index for each of a plurality of held foods including the one or more held foods, and the control unit determines a plurality of suggested candidates, and issues a presentation instruction such that the greater the number of suggested candidates among the determined plurality of suggested candidates for which a food loss index greater than a second threshold value is calculated, the greater the number of suggested candidates to be presented in a specified presentation area.

[0028] This allows the user to check at a glance which foods are approaching their expiration dates.

[0029] A food recommendation device according to a ninth aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation device according to any one of the fifth to eighth aspects, wherein the control unit gives a presentation instruction to display the recommendation candidates in different display modes depending on the food loss index.

[0030] This makes it easy to make the user aware of the priority of foods that the user should be encouraged to consume.

[0031] A food recommendation device according to a tenth aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation device according to any one of the fifth to ninth aspects, wherein the control unit instructs the presentation of the recommendation candidates along with the reasons for determining the recommendation candidates, and the reasons for the recommendation are determined according to the food waste index of the recommendation candidates.

[0032] This allows the user to be informed of the reason for the suggestion based on the degree of deterioration of the food.

[0033] A food recommendation device according to an eleventh aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation device according to any one of the first to tenth aspects, wherein the shelf life is changed depending on the condition of the stored food.

[0034] Therefore, even if the storage conditions and the rate of deterioration differ, it is possible to propose foods that can be safely consumed.

[0035] A food suggestion device according to a twelfth aspect of the present disclosure is a food suggestion device according to any one of the first to eleventh aspects, wherein the memory unit further includes third type information indicating a type of food and stores second suggested food information indicating that the food of the third type information has not been suggested by the food suggestion device, and the control unit instructs the first held food to be presented as a suggestion candidate when the type indicated by the first type information is the same as the type indicated by the third type information.

[0036] A food recommendation method according to a thirteenth aspect of the present disclosure is a food recommendation method by a food recommendation device that suggests consumption of one or more held foods held by a user, the method comprising: acquiring held food information including first type information indicating the type of a first held food included in the one or more held foods, start date information indicating the start date of holding the first held food, and shelf life information indicating the number of days the first held food can be stored; determining a proposal interval until the next proposal of the first held food based on a first number of days elapsed since the holding start date indicated by the start date information and the number of days the first held food can be stored indicated by the shelf life information; acquiring first suggested food information including second type information indicating the type of food and proposal date information indicating the proposal date on which the food of the second type information was proposed by the food recommendation device; if a second number of days elapsed since the proposal date indicated by proposal date information corresponding to second type information indicating the same type as the first held food is longer than the proposal interval, instructing to present the first held food as a proposal candidate; and if the second number of days elapsed is shorter than the proposal interval, not instructing to present the first held food as a proposal candidate.

[0037] According to this, the system determines the suggestion interval based on the first number of days elapsed since the food's possession start date and the food's shelf life, and determines whether to suggest food consumption to the user based on a comparison of the suggestion interval with the second number of days elapsed since the previous suggestion date. In this way, the system determines whether to suggest food consumption to the user taking into account the food's shelf life, thereby encouraging the user to plan their food consumption without making the user aware of the shelf life of each food item. This contributes to the achievement of the SDGs.

[0038] A program according to a fourteenth aspect of the present disclosure is a program for causing a computer to execute the food suggestion method according to the thirteenth aspect.

[0039] These general or specific aspects may be realized by a device, an integrated circuit, a computer program, or a non-transitory recording medium such as a computer-readable CD-ROM, or by any combination of a device, an integrated circuit, a computer program, and a non-transitory recording medium.

[0040] Hereinafter, embodiments will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. However, more detailed explanation than necessary may be omitted. For example, detailed explanation of well-known matters or redundant explanation of substantially the same configuration may be omitted. This is to avoid unnecessary redundancy in the following explanation and to facilitate understanding by those skilled in the art.

[0041] The inventor provides the accompanying drawings and the following description so that those skilled in the art can fully understand the present disclosure, and does not intend for them to limit the subject matter described in the claims.

[0042] (First embodiment) [1-1. Configuration] FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining an overview of a food recommendation device according to a first embodiment.

[0043] The food recommendation device 100 suggests consumption of foods 11-15 owned by user U1. The food recommendation device 100 is a device that supports user U1's planned consumption of foods 11-15. For example, when user U1 acquires foods 11-15, user U1 registers owned food information about the acquired foods 11-15 in the food recommendation device 100. Based on the registered owned food information and suggested food information related to the food recommendation history up to that point, the food recommendation device 100 suggests foods to be consumed each time (for example, when user U1 prepares a meal) so that user U1 can consume foods 11-15 in a planned manner. In other words, the food recommendation device 100 suggests, for each type of food, the timing for user U1 to systematically consume the foods acquired by user U1. Here, planned consumption means consuming the food by the expiration date by which user U1 can safely eat the food, or by the best-before date by which the food maintains its quality and can be eaten deliciously. In the following description, unless otherwise specified, the expiration date is assumed to include the concept of best-before date. Note that the best-before date may also include the concept of expiry date.

[0044] Foods 11 to 15 may be ingredients such as vegetables, meat, fish, and rice, or may be processed foods made from processed ingredients. In FIG. 1, foods 11 to 15 are exemplified by Chinese cabbage, onion, cabbage, carrot, and raw meat, respectively. Note that the number of owned foods that can be suggested by the food suggestion device 100 (i.e., the foods selected for suggestion) may be one. In other words, even if user U1 only owns one type of food, the food suggestion device 100 can support user U1 in systematically consuming that one type of food.

[0045] In FIG. 1 , the food recommendation device 100 is illustrated as, for example, a smartphone, but is not limited to this and may be a tablet terminal, a VPA (Virtual Personal Assistant) device, or a PC (Personal Computer).

[0046] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration of the food suggestion device according to the first embodiment.

[0047] 2, the food recommendation device 100 includes, as its hardware configuration, a processor 101, a main memory 102, a storage 103, a communication IF (Interface) 104, an input IF (Interface) 105, a display 106, and a camera 107. Note that the food recommendation device 100 does not need to include all of the communication IF 104, the input IF 105, the display 106, and the camera 107, as long as it includes one of the communication IF 104, the input IF 105, and the camera 107 that has a function of acquiring information, and one of the communication IF 104 and the display 106 that has a function of outputting information.

[0048] The processor 101 is a processor that executes a program stored in the storage 103 or the like.

[0049] The main memory 102 is a volatile storage area that is used to temporarily store data generated during processing by the processor 101, used as a work area when the processor 101 executes a program, and used to temporarily store data received by the communication IF 104 and data accepted by the input IF 105.

[0050] The storage 103 is a non-volatile storage device that holds various data such as programs. The storage 103 stores, for example, various data generated as a result of processing by the processor 101. The storage 103 also stores the held food information and the suggested food information.

[0051] The communication IF 104 is a communication interface for transmitting data to and from external information devices such as smartphones, tablet terminals, PCs, and servers. The communication IF 104 may be, for example, an interface for wireless communication such as a wireless LAN interface or a Bluetooth (registered trademark) interface. The communication IF 104 may also be an interface for wired communication such as a USB (Universal Serial Bus) or a wired LAN interface. Note that the communication IF 104 is not limited to the above, and may also be a communication interface for transmitting data to and from external devices via a communication network.

[0052] The input IF 105 is an interface for receiving input from a user. The input IF 105 may be a pointing device such as a mouse, a touchpad, a touch panel, or a trackball, or may be a keyboard. The input IF 105 may also be an interface for receiving input by voice uttered by the user. In other words, the input IF 105 may be a microphone.

[0053] The display 106 is a device that displays part of the processing results by the processor 101. The display 106 is, for example, a liquid crystal display, an organic EL display, or the like.

[0054] The camera 107 has an optical system such as a lens and an image sensor. The camera 107 generates image data by capturing an image. The generated image data may be still image data or video data. The camera 107 may be a color camera or a monochrome camera. The camera 107 may be a stereo camera.

[0055] FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an example of a functional configuration of the food suggestion device according to the first embodiment.

[0056] The food suggestion device 100 includes an input receiving unit 110, a management unit 120, a storage period database (DB) 130, a held food database (DB) 131, a determination unit 140, a suggested interval database (DB) 150, a control unit 160, a suggested food database (DB) 170, and a display unit 180.

[0057] The input receiving unit 110 receives input from the user U1. Specifically, the input receiving unit 110 receives input from the user U1 regarding the registration of the foods 11 to 15 that the user U1 has acquired, for each type of the foods 11 to 15. The input regarding the registration includes at least type information indicating the type of food. The input regarding the registration may further include location information indicating where the acquired food is stored. The input regarding the registration may further include quantity information indicating the amount of the acquired food. The input receiving unit 110 outputs the received information to the management unit 120. The input receiving unit 110 outputs at least the received type information to the management unit 120. If the input receiving unit 110 further receives quantity information, it outputs the quantity information together with the type information to the management unit 120. The input for registration may be made through a UI (User Interface) that allows the user U1 to select from options for food type candidates, by accepting text about the food type, by voice recognition, or by image recognition of image data obtained by photographing the food, a receipt from the food purchase, or a QR code (registered trademark) with a camera.

[0058] The input reception unit 110 is realized by, for example, the input IF 105. Note that the input reception unit 110 may be realized by the communication IF 104 and a device (an input device such as a keyboard) connected via the communication IF 104, or may be realized by a combination of the camera 107 and the processor 101 (i.e., a configuration for realizing image recognition).

[0059] When the management unit 120 acquires type information from the input receiving unit 110, it generates start date information indicating the date on which the food item began to be held. Specifically, the management unit 120 generates start date information by setting the date on which the type information was acquired as the date on which the food item of the type indicated by the type information was held. The holding start date is set, for example, to the date and time measured by the processor 101 that implements the management unit 120 at the time the type information is acquired. Note that the start date information may also be set to a date specified by the user U1. In other words, the start date information may be specified by an input by the user U1 to the input receiving unit 110.

[0060] Furthermore, when the management unit 120 acquires type information from the input accepting unit 110, it generates shelf life information indicating the shelf life of the type of food indicated by the type information. Specifically, the management unit 120 uses the type of food indicated by the type information to refer to the shelf life DB 130, in which food types and shelf lifes are pre-associated, to identify the shelf life pre-associated with the type of food, and generates shelf life information indicating the identified shelf life. Furthermore, when the management unit 120 acquires location information from the input accepting unit 110, it may use the storage location of the food indicated by the location information to refer to the shelf life DB 130 to identify the shelf life pre-associated with the type of food and its storage location. The shelf life information may be generated based on input received by the input accepting unit 110 from the user. In other words, the shelf life information may be generated based on a numerical value indicating the shelf life input by the user.

[0061] A specific example of the storage limit DB 130 will now be described with reference to Fig. 4. Fig. 4 is a diagram showing an example of the storage limit DB.

[0062] As shown in FIG. 4 , the shelf life DB 130 associates a food ID for identifying a food, a food type (food name), a food storage location, and a shelf life. The shelf life DB 130 only needs to associate a food type with a shelf life; it need not associate a food ID with a storage location. For example, the shelf life DB 130 may be stored in the storage 103 or in an external server. If the shelf life DB 130 is stored in an external server, the management unit 120 connects to the external server using the communication IF 104 and references the shelf life DB 130. The shelf life information may be specified by user U1 through input to the input receiving unit 110.

[0063] In this way, when the management unit 120 acquires type information from the input receiving unit 110, it generates start date information and storage period information, and generates held food information including type information, start date information, and storage period information. The type information included in the held food information is an example of first type information. When the management unit 120 acquires location information, it further generates held food information including location information. When the management unit 120 acquires quantity information, it further generates held food information including quantity information. The held food information does not need to include storage period information. When the held food information does not include storage period information, the management unit 120 may refer to the storage period DB 130 based on the type information included in the held food information to identify the storage period information corresponding to the held food information.

[0064] Here, the held food information is generated for each timing at which type information is acquired and for each type of food. In other words, the management unit 120 generates different held food information for the same type of food if the timing at which type information was acquired is different or the type of food is different. The held food information may also be generated for each location information. In other words, the management unit 120 may generate different held food information for the same type of food if the timing at which type information was acquired is different, the type of food is different, or the location information is different.

[0065] Furthermore, management unit 120 records the generated held food information in held food DB 131. Management unit 120 generates held food information for each type of information and records the generated held food information in held food DB 131. Management unit 120 also outputs the held food information recorded in held food DB 131 to determination unit 140 at a predetermined timing. The predetermined timing may be every time a predetermined period has elapsed, may be a specified timing, or may be timing based on the execution of a predetermined process.

[0066] The management unit 120 is realized, for example, by the processor 101 using the main memory 102 to execute a program stored in the storage 103 .

[0067] A specific example of the owned food DB 131 will now be described with reference to Fig. 5. Fig. 5 is a diagram showing an example of the owned food DB.

[0068] As shown in Figure 5, in the held food DB 131, a held food ID for identifying registered held food is associated with the food ID, the type of food (food name), the storage location of the food, the registration date, and the number of days the food can be stored. A series of information associated with one held food ID in the held food DB 131 constitutes one held food information. In other words, the held food DB 131 includes multiple held food information items generated by the management unit 120. The held food DB 131 is stored in, for example, the storage 103. The storage 103 in which the held food DB 131 is stored is an example of a memory unit.

[0069] The above explanation of the input receiving unit 110, the management unit 120, and the owned food DB 131 has described the process of registering owned food information about foods acquired by user U1 in the owned food DB 131. However, when user U1 consumes owned foods, the owned food information contained in the owned food DB 131 may be updated accordingly. In this case, the input receiving unit 110 receives input from user U1 regarding food consumption for each type of food. The consumption input may include type information indicating the type of food and quantity information indicating the amount of food consumed. The registration input and the consumption input differ in that the quantity information in the registration input indicates a positive value, while the quantity information in the consumption input indicates a negative value.

[0070] As a result, based on the consumption input, the management unit 120 identifies from the held food DB 131 the held food information corresponding to the type information included in the input, and updates the quantity information included in the identified held food information based on the quantity information included in the consumption input. In other words, the management unit 120 subtracts the quantity of food indicated by the quantity information included in the consumption input from the quantity information included in the identified held food information, and updates the quantity information to indicate the subtraction result. If the subtraction result is zero, the management unit 120 may delete the identified held food information from the held food DB 131, or may add information indicating that no food exists that corresponds to the identified held food information. When adding information indicating that no food exists that corresponds to the identified held food information, the held food information is not deleted but is retained in the held food DB 131.

[0071] Furthermore, the held food information stored in the held food DB 131 may be updated by an input from the user U1 to the input receiving unit 110. For example, the shelf life information in the held food information may be changed based on an input from the user U1.

[0072] 6 and 7 are diagrams showing an example of a UI that accepts input from the user regarding consumption of food items in their possession.

[0073] As shown in Figure 6, UI 111 displays a list of owned foods and accepts input of consumed foods from the list. UI 111 is generated based on owned food information contained in owned food DB 131. UI 111 includes the quantity, location, registration date, and expiration date indicated in the owned food information, as well as an edit button for transitioning to UI 112 where this information can be edited. The expiration date is calculated by adding the number of days that the food can be stored to the registration date.

[0074] As shown in FIG. 7 , UI 112 is a UI for editing the retained food information corresponding to the edit button accepted by UI 111. UI 112 includes the quantity, location, registration date, and expiration date indicated by the selected retained food information, as well as buttons for editing these items (in the figure, ">"). For example, when an input is made to a button corresponding to the quantity in UI 112, a UI for editing the quantity is displayed, and the user can change the quantity by inputting information into this UI. When editing the quantity, the user may input the quantity of food consumed or the quantity of food remaining. When the quantity of food consumed is input, the input quantity is subtracted from the quantity before editing, and the quantity of the retained food information is updated to the calculated remaining quantity. When the quantity of food remaining is input, the quantity of the retained food information is updated to the input remaining quantity.

[0075] Based on the held food information output by the management unit 120, the determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval between the time when a food of the type indicated by the type information included in the held food information is proposed to user U1 and the time when the food is next proposed to user U1. The determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval for each held food information. Here, the food of the type indicated by the type information included in the held food information to be processed is referred to as the first held food. In other words, the proposal interval indicates the period from the last proposal date to the next proposal date for the consumption of a food of the same type as the first held food. Specifically, the determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval based on the first number of days elapsed from the holding start date indicated by the start date information included in the held food information to be processed and the number of available storage days indicated by the available storage days information included in the held food information to be processed. The first number of days elapsed is, for example, the number of days elapsed from the holding start date to the time when the determination unit 140 acquires the held food information from the management unit 120 (i.e., the day on which the proposal interval is determined).

[0076] When determining the proposed interval, the determination unit 140 calculates a food loss index indicating the degree of deterioration of the first held food based on the first elapsed days and the shelf life. The degree of deterioration is the degree of deterioration in the quality of the food. The degree of deterioration is an index that has an inverse relationship with the freshness of the food. In other words, the degree of deterioration and freshness are indexes that indicate the degree of quality of the food. The food loss index is sometimes referred to as the FL index.

[0077] FIG. 8 is a graph showing the relationship between the first elapsed days and the food loss index for each number of days that food can be stored.

[0078] The determination unit 140 may calculate the food loss index based on the first number of elapsed days and the number of possible storage days using the relationship shown in FIG. 8 . For example, the determination unit 140 may calculate the food loss index by dividing the first number of elapsed days by the number of possible storage days. The food loss index may be proportional to the first number of elapsed days, as shown in FIG. 8 . The food loss index may be calculated to a value closer to 0 the closer to the holding start date, and closer to 1.0 the closer to the expiration date. Note that the food loss index may be calculated to a value that increases as the first number of elapsed days increases (i.e., it may monotonically increase with respect to the first number of elapsed days), and does not have to be proportional to the first number of elapsed days. The determination unit 140 may acquire relationship information indicating the relationship between the first number of elapsed days and the food loss index for each number of possible storage days from the proposed interval DB 150.

[0079] The method for determining the food loss index may vary depending on the type of food. For example, for food whose quality is likely to deteriorate in the first half of its shelf life, the food loss index may be calculated so that the rate at which the food loss index increases in the first half of its shelf life is greater than the rate at which the food loss index increases in the second half of its shelf life. Conversely, for food whose quality is likely to deteriorate in the second half of its shelf life, the food loss index may be calculated so that the rate at which the food loss index increases in the second half of its shelf life is greater than the rate at which the food loss index increases in the first half of its shelf life.

[0080] When determining the proposed interval, the determination unit 140 determines the proposed interval by referring to the proposed interval determination table included in the proposed interval DB 150 based on the food waste index and the number of days that the first held food can be stored.

[0081] FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of a proposal interval determination table for determining a proposal interval based on the food loss index and the number of days that food can be stored.

[0082] As shown in Figure 9, the suggested interval determination table is a table in which combinations of food loss index and storage period are associated with suggested intervals. In the suggested interval determination table, the food loss index is divided into multiple levels. For example, in Figure 9, the food loss index is divided into three levels: a range of 0.0 or more and less than 0.4, a range of 0.4 or more and less than 0.8, and a range of 0.8 or more and less than 1.0. Note that the suggested interval determination table is not limited to dividing the food loss index into three levels, and may also divide the food loss index into two levels, four levels or more, as long as it is divided into multiple levels.

[0083] In the proposal interval determination table, the food loss index and the proposal interval are associated so that, for the same storage period, the larger the food loss index, the shorter the proposal interval. Since the food loss index is calculated to be a larger value the longer the first elapsed number of days, the determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval so that the longer the first elapsed number of days, the shorter the proposal interval.

[0084] In the proposal interval determination table, the number of days that can be stored is associated with the proposal interval so that the shorter the number of days that can be stored, the shorter the proposal interval for the same food loss index category. Therefore, the determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval so that the shorter the number of days that can be stored, the shorter the proposal interval.

[0085] Furthermore, the determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval for each piece of retained food information. Since the retained food information is generated for each timing when type information is acquired and for each type of food, the determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval for each food indicated by the generated retained food information.

[0086] The determination unit 140 is realized, for example, by the processor 101 using the main memory 102 to execute a program stored in the storage 103 .

[0087] The proposed interval DB 150 includes a proposed interval determination table. The proposed interval DB 150 may further store relationship information indicating the relationship between the first elapsed days and the food loss index for each possible storage period. The proposed interval DB 150 is stored in, for example, the storage 103.

[0088] The control unit 160 compares the proposal interval determined by the determination unit 140 with the second number of elapsed days and determines whether to present the first held food item based on the comparison result. The second number of elapsed days is the number of days that have elapsed since the proposal date when a food of the same type as the first held food item was last proposed to user U1 until the process of determining whether to present the first held food item is performed. The second number of elapsed days is determined based on the first proposed food information obtained by referencing the proposed food DB 170. The first proposed food information is included in the proposed food DB 170 and includes second type information indicating the type of food and proposal date information indicating the proposal date when the food of the second type information was proposed by the food proposal device 100. In other words, the first proposed food information is information indicating the track record (proposal history) of proposed foods previously proposed by the food proposal device 100.

[0089] When determining whether to present the first held food, if the second number of elapsed days is longer than the proposal interval determined by the determination unit 140, the control unit 160 instructs the display unit 180 to present the first held food as a proposal candidate. By instructing the display unit 180 to present the first held food, the control unit 160 causes the display unit 180 to make a presentation encouraging consumption of the first held food. Specifically, the control unit 160 outputs a control signal to the display unit 180 to cause the display unit 180 to make the presentation. The control signal includes, for example, drawing data for drawing a message encouraging consumption of the first held food. On the other hand, if the second number of elapsed days is shorter than the proposal interval, the control unit 160 does not instruct the display unit 180 to present the first held food as a proposal candidate. By not instructing the display unit 180 to present the first held food, the control unit 160 does not cause the display unit 180 to make a presentation encouraging consumption of the first held food.

[0090] When the suggestion interval and the second number of elapsed days are the same, the control unit 160 may or may not cause the display unit 180 to make a prompt to consume the first held food. In this case, whether or not to make a prompt may be determined in advance or may be specified by the user U1.

[0091] Furthermore, when there are multiple held foods determined to be presented (i.e., held foods determined to be recommendation candidates), the control unit 160 may instruct the held food with the highest food loss index to be presented preferentially. When the food loss indices of multiple held foods determined to be presented are the same or similar, the control unit 160 may instruct the held food with the shortest shelf life to be presented preferentially. In other words, the control unit 160 may determine whether the difference between the first food loss index of a first held food and the second food loss index of a second held food different from the first held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, and if the difference is equal to or less than the first threshold, may instruct the held food with the shortest shelf life to be presented preferentially, between the first held food and the second held food.

[0092] Furthermore, when the food loss indexes of multiple held foods that have been decided to be presented are the same or similar, the control unit 160 may instruct the held food with the larger held quantity to be presented preferentially. In other words, the control unit 160 may determine whether the difference between the first food loss index of a first held food and the second food loss index of a second held food that is different from the first held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, and if the difference is equal to or less than the first threshold, may instruct the held food with the larger held quantity to be presented preferentially.

[0093] Furthermore, when there are multiple owned foods that have been determined to be presented, the control unit 160 may determine the number of suggested candidate foods to be presented in a predetermined presentation area according to the number of suggested candidate foods for which a food loss index exceeding a second threshold is calculated. The second threshold may be, for example, 0.8. The second threshold is not limited to 0.8 and may be a value equal to or greater than 0.6. For example, the control unit 160 may instruct the display unit 100 to increase the number of suggested candidate foods to be presented in a predetermined presentation area as the number of suggested candidate foods for which a food loss index exceeding the second threshold increases.

[0094] The control unit 160 may also instruct the display of the proposal candidates in different display modes depending on the food loss index.

[0095] Furthermore, the control unit 160 may instruct the first stored food to be presented as a suggested candidate if the type indicated by the first type information is the same as the type indicated by the third type information included in the second suggested food information. The second suggested food information is included in the suggested food DB 170, includes third type information indicating the type of food, and indicates that the food of the third type information has not been suggested by the food suggestion device 100. In other words, the second suggested food information is information indicating an unsuggested food. For example, the second suggested food information does not include suggestion date information, indicating that the food has not been suggested. Note that the third type information indicates a food type different from the type indicated by the second type information.

[0096] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a screen displayed on the display unit in response to a presentation instruction.

[0097] Screen 300 presents the foods determined as suggested candidates. Screen 300 includes icon 301 encouraging consumption of Chinese cabbage, which is food 11, and icon 302 encouraging consumption of onion, which is food 12. For example, assume that the food loss index of food 11 is 0.9 and the food loss index of food 12 is 0.7. As shown in FIG. 10 , icon 301 may be displayed in a manner indicating that the food loss index of food 11 is in the range of 0.8 or more, and icon 302 may be displayed in a manner indicating that the food loss index of food 12 is in the range of 0.4 or more and less than 0.8.

[0098] The control unit 160 may also instruct the display of the suggested candidate together with the reason for the suggestion. The reason for the suggestion may be determined according to the food loss index of the suggested candidate. The control unit 160 may also suggest a recipe that includes one or more suggested candidates.

[0099] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of the reason for suggestion according to the food loss index.

[0100] As shown in FIG. 11, reasons for suggestion may be determined in advance according to the three-level food loss index classification.

[0101] A specific example of the suggested food DB 170 will be described with reference to Fig. 12. Fig. 12 is a diagram showing an example of the suggested food DB.

[0102] As shown in FIG. 12 , the suggested food DB 170 associates the food ID of a food suggested to a user with the type of food (food name) and the proposed date on which that type of food was proposed. A series of information associated with one food ID in the suggested food DB 170 constitutes one first suggested food information. In other words, the suggested food DB 170 includes multiple first suggested food information. Although not shown in FIG. 12 , the suggested food DB 170 may also include second suggested food information that is not associated with a proposed date. The suggested food DB 170 may indicate whether or not each type of food has been proposed by including or not including a proposed date. However, without being limited to this, the suggested food DB 170 may indicate whether or not each type of food has been proposed by including only first suggested food information that indicates the track record of the suggested food.

[0103] Furthermore, the suggested food DB 170 may store N proposed dates (N is an integer equal to or greater than 1) in reverse chronological order, including the most recent proposed date. Furthermore, proposed dates older than the N proposed dates in the suggested food DB 170 may be deleted. The suggested food DB 170 is stored, for example, in the storage 103. The storage 103 in which the suggested food DB 170 is stored is an example of a storage unit.

[0104] The proposed date may be the date on which a user is prompted to consume a food, or the date on which the user accepts the prompt and consumes the suggested food after receiving the prompt. The proposed date may not only be recorded in the proposed food DB 170, but also be recorded for each held food managed by held food information unit. In other words, the proposed date may be added to the held food information corresponding to the proposed food. In this case, the proposed date included in the held food information may be used in the process using the proposed date in the food suggestion process described below with reference to FIG. 14. The proposed date added to the held food information may be only the most recent proposed date, or may be all of the one or more days proposed until the held food in the held food information is consumed. The proposed date does not have to be added to the held food information, and may be managed for each type of food.

[0105] The display unit 180 presents a message encouraging consumption of the first held food item in response to the control signal obtained from the control unit 160. The display unit 180 is realized by the display 106, for example.

[0106] [1-2. Operation] Next, the operation of the food recommendation device 100 according to the first embodiment will be described.

[0107] First, a description will be given of the food registration process performed by the food recommendation device 100. Fig. 13 is a flowchart showing an example of the food registration process performed by the food recommendation device according to the first embodiment.

[0108] The food recommendation device 100 receives input from the user U1 regarding the registration of the foods 11 to 15 that the user U1 has acquired, for each type of the foods 11 to 15 (S11). Step S11 is a process performed by the input receiving unit 110.

[0109] Next, when the food recommendation device 100 receives an input from the user U1 regarding the registration of the foods 11 to 15 that the user U1 has acquired, the food recommendation device 100 generates the owned food information based on the input (S12). Step S12 is a process performed by the management unit 120.

[0110] Next, the food recommendation device 100 records the generated held food information in the held food DB 131 (S13). Step S13 is a process performed by the management unit 120 on the held food DB 131.

[0111] Next, a description will be given of a food recommendation process performed by the food recommendation device 100. Fig. 14 is a flowchart showing an example of a food recommendation process performed by the food recommendation device according to the first embodiment.

[0112] The food suggestion device 100 acquires the held food information from the held food DB 131 (S21). Step S21 is a process performed by the management unit 120. When the management unit 120 performs the process of step S21, the held food information is output to the determination unit 140.

[0113] Next, the food recommendation device 100 calculates the food loss index of the first held food by dividing the first number of days elapsed since the holding start date of the first held food by the number of days that the first held food can be stored (S22).

[0114] Next, the food recommendation device 100 determines whether the food loss index is 1.0 or less (S23). A food loss index greater than 1.0 indicates that the expiration date has passed, so in step S23, a determination is made to exclude foods with a food loss index greater than 1.0 from the candidates to be recommended. Step S23 is a process performed by the determination unit 140.

[0115] If the food loss index is 1.0 or less (Yes in S23), the food recommendation device 100 determines a proposal interval by referring to a proposal interval determination table included in the proposal interval DB 150 based on the food loss index and the shelf life of the first held food (S24). Step S24 is a process performed by the determination unit 140.

[0116] Next, the food recommendation device 100 acquires suggested food information from the suggested food DB 170 (S25). Specifically, the food recommendation device 100 acquires the held food information from the held food DB 131 and identifies the type of the first held food. Then, the food recommendation device 100 acquires suggested food information corresponding to the identified type from the suggested food DB 170. Step S25 is a process performed by the control unit 160.

[0117] Next, the food recommendation device 100 determines whether or not the proposal date of the previous proposal of a food of the same type as the first held food has been acquired (S26). Specifically, the food recommendation device 100 determines whether or not the proposed date is included in the acquired proposed food information. If the proposed food information includes the proposed date, the food recommendation device 100 acquires the proposed date. If the proposed food information does not include the proposed date, the food recommendation device 100 does not acquire the proposed date.

[0118] Next, when the food recommendation device 100 acquires the proposal date of the previous proposal (Yes in S26), it determines whether the proposal interval determined in step S24 is shorter than the second elapsed days (S27). Specifically, the second elapsed days is calculated as follows: The food recommendation device 100 acquires proposed food information from the proposed food DB 170, and identifies the proposal date on which the same type of food as the first held food was previously proposed to user U1 based on the acquired proposed food information. Then, the food recommendation device 100 calculates the number of days elapsed from the identified proposal date to the time when the process of determining whether to present the first held food is performed as the second elapsed days. Step S27 is processed by the control unit 160.

[0119] Next, if the food suggestion device 100 does not obtain the proposal date of the previous proposal (No in S26), or if the proposal interval is shorter than the second elapsed days (Yes in S27), it determines the first held food as a proposal candidate and presents a suggestion encouraging consumption of the first held food (S28).

[0120] If the food loss index is greater than 1.0 (No in S23) or if the proposal interval is longer than the second elapsed days (No in S27), the food recommendation device 100 ends the process. In other words, in this case, no presentation is made to encourage consumption of the first held food.

[0121] Steps S28 and S29 are processes performed by the control unit 160 and the display unit 180.

[0122] Note that the process of step S26 does not need to be performed in the following cases. That is, the food recommendation device 100 may execute step S27 after step S25. For example, the proposal date information of the suggested food information may be set to a default proposal date for each type of food. The default proposal date may be the registration date of the corresponding type of food, or a specific past date. The specific past date may be, for example, the date the app was first used, the date the food recommendation device 100 was manufactured, or a date before the app was first used, or a date before the food recommendation device 100 was manufactured.

[0123] [1-3. Effects, etc.] The food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment suggests consumption of one or more held foods held by a user. The food recommendation device 100 includes a memory unit (held food DB 131 and suggested food DB 170), a determination unit 140, and a control unit 160. The memory unit stores held food information and suggested food information. The held food information includes first type information indicating the type of a first held food included in the one or more held foods, start date information indicating the holding start date of the first held food, and shelf life information indicating the shelf life of the first held food. The suggested food information includes second type information indicating the type of suggested food suggested by the food recommendation device 100, and suggested date information indicating the proposal date of the suggested food. The determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval until the next suggestion of the first held food based on the first number of days elapsed since the holding start date indicated by the start date information and the shelf life indicated by the shelf life information. The control unit 160 instructs the first held food to be presented as a proposal candidate when the second number of days elapsed since the proposal date indicated by the proposal date information corresponding to the second type information indicating the same type as the first held food is longer than the proposal interval. The control unit 160 does not instruct the first held food to be presented as a proposal candidate when the second number of days elapsed since the proposal date indicated by the proposal date information corresponding to the second type information indicating the same type as the first held food is shorter than the proposal interval.

[0124] According to this, the system determines the suggestion interval based on the first number of days elapsed since the food's possession start date and the food's shelf life, and determines whether to suggest food consumption to the user based on a comparison of the suggestion interval with the second number of days elapsed since the previous suggestion date. In this way, the system determines whether to suggest food consumption to the user taking into account the food's shelf life, thereby encouraging the user to plan their food consumption without making the user aware of the shelf life of each food item. This contributes to the achievement of the SDGs.

[0125] Furthermore, in the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the determination unit 140 determines the recommendation interval so that the longer the first elapsed days, the shorter the recommendation interval becomes.

[0126] Therefore, the closer a food item is to the end of its shelf life (i.e., its expiration date), the more frequently the suggestion can be made, thereby encouraging the user to prioritize consumption of food items approaching their expiration date.

[0127] Furthermore, in the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the determination unit 140 determines the recommendation interval so that the shorter the available storage period, the shorter the recommendation interval.

[0128] This allows for a higher frequency of suggestions for foods that are approaching the end of their shelf life (i.e., their expiration date), thereby encouraging the user to consume those foods as a priority.

[0129] Furthermore, in the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the determination unit 140 determines a recommendation interval for each of one or more types of held food items.

[0130] This allows the proposal interval to be changed for each of one or more types of food items held, so that held foods can be proposed at a proposal frequency appropriate for the type of food items held.

[0131] Furthermore, in the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the determination unit 140 calculates a food loss index that indicates the degree of deterioration of the first held food based on the first elapsed days and the number of days that can be stored. The determination unit 140 determines the recommendation interval based on the calculated food loss index and the number of days that can be stored.

[0132] This allows the degree of deterioration of stored food to be evaluated using the food waste index regardless of the number of days it can be stored, thereby simplifying the process for determining the suggested interval.

[0133] Furthermore, in the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the one or more held foods include a first held food and a second held food. The determination unit 140 calculates a food loss index for each of the one or more held foods. If the difference between the first food loss index of the first held food and the second food loss index of the second held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, the control unit 160 instructs the display device 100 to prioritize the held food with the shorter shelf life between the first held food and the second held food.

[0134] Therefore, if the food waste indexes are similar, the user can be encouraged to prioritize consumption of the food item with the shortest shelf life.

[0135] Furthermore, in the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the one or more held foods include a first held food and a second held food. The determination unit 140 calculates a food loss index for each of the one or more held foods. If the difference between the first food loss index of the first held food and the second food loss index of the second held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, the control unit 160 instructs the display device 100 to prioritize the held food with the larger held quantity between the first held food and the second held food.

[0136] Therefore, if the food loss indices are similar to each other, the user can be encouraged to prioritize consumption of the food item with the larger amount.

[0137] In the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the determination unit 140 calculates a food loss index for each of a plurality of held foods, including one or more held foods. The control unit 160 determines a plurality of suggested candidates, and issues a presentation instruction to increase the number of suggested candidates to be presented in a predetermined presentation area as the number of suggested candidates with a calculated food loss index greater than the second threshold increases among the determined plurality of suggested candidates.

[0138] This allows the user to check at a glance which foods are approaching their expiration dates.

[0139] Furthermore, in the food recommendation device 100 according to this embodiment, the control unit 160 issues a presentation instruction to display the recommendation candidates in different display modes depending on the food loss index.

[0140] This makes it easy to make the user aware of the priority of foods that the user should be encouraged to consume.

[0141] In the food recommendation device 100 according to the present embodiment, the control unit 160 instructs the presentation of the recommendation candidates together with the reasons for their selection. The reasons for selection are determined according to the food loss index of the recommendation candidates.

[0142] This allows the user to be informed of the reason for the suggestion based on the degree of deterioration of the food.

[0143] Second Embodiment FIG. 15 is a diagram for explaining an overview of a food recommendation device according to a second embodiment.

[0144] The food recommendation device 200 according to the second embodiment differs from the food recommendation device 100 according to the first embodiment in that it does not accept and present input information, but instead performs processing to suggest foods in response to input information. The processing to accept and present input information is performed by the mobile terminal 400. The food recommendation device 200 acquires the result of accepting the input information from the mobile terminal 400 via the communication network 50. The food recommendation device 200 also instructs the mobile terminal 400 to make presentations in accordance with the results of the processing to suggest foods.

[0145] The mobile terminal 400 may be, for example, a smartphone, a tablet terminal, a VPA (Virtual Personal Assistant) device, or a PC (Personal Computer). The food recommendation device 200 is a server communicably connected to the mobile terminal 400 via a communication network 50. The mobile terminal 400 and the food recommendation device 200 constitute a food recommendation system 1.

[0146] FIG. 16 is a block diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration of a food recommendation device according to the second embodiment.

[0147] 16 , the food recommendation device 200 includes, as its hardware configuration, a processor 201, a main memory 202, a storage 203, a communication IF (Interface) 204, an input IF (Interface) 205, and a display 206. Note that the food recommendation device 200 does not necessarily have to include the input IF 205 and the display 206.

[0148] The processor 201, main memory 202, storage 203, communication IF 204, input IF 205, and display 206 are respectively the same as the processor 101, main memory 102, storage 103, communication IF 104, input IF 105, and display 106 of the food recommendation device 100 according to embodiment 1. Therefore, detailed descriptions of the processor 201, main memory 202, storage 203, communication IF 204, input IF 205, and display 206 will be omitted. In addition, the hardware configuration of the mobile terminal 400 is the same as the hardware configuration of the food recommendation device 100 according to embodiment 1, so detailed descriptions will be omitted.

[0149] FIG. 17 is a block diagram illustrating an example of a functional configuration of a food recommendation system according to the second embodiment.

[0150] The mobile terminal 400 includes an input receiving unit 410 and a display unit 480 .

[0151] The input receiving unit 410 corresponds to the input receiving unit 110 in Embodiment 1. The input receiving unit 410 further differs from the input receiving unit 110 in that the input receiving unit 410 transmits the received input to the food recommendation device 200 via the communication network 50.

[0152] The display unit 480 corresponds to the display unit 180 in Embodiment 1. The display unit 480 further differs from the display unit 180 in that the display unit 480 acquires a control signal indicating a presentation instruction from the food recommendation device 200 via the communication network 50.

[0153] The food suggestion device 200 includes a management unit 220, a storage limit DB 230, a held food DB 231, a determination unit 240, a proposed interval DB 250, a control unit 260, and a suggested food DB 270. The management unit 220, the storage limit DB 230, the held food DB 231, the determination unit 240, the proposed interval DB 250, the control unit 260, and the suggested food DB 270 are the same as the management unit 120, the storage limit DB 130, the held food DB 131, the determination unit 140, the proposed interval DB 150, the control unit 160, and the suggested food DB 170 in embodiment 1, respectively. Therefore, detailed descriptions of the management unit 220, the storage limit DB 230, the held food DB 231, the determination unit 240, the proposed interval DB 250, the control unit 260, and the suggested food DB 270 will be omitted.

[0154] (Variation 1) In the above embodiment, the determination unit 140 calculates a food loss index based on the first number of days elapsed since the holding start date, and determines a proposal interval for the first held food by referring to a proposal interval determination table based on the calculated food loss index and the remaining shelf life. In other words, the determination unit 140 calculates the food loss index to determine the proposal interval. However, the determination unit 140 may determine the proposal interval for the first held food based on the first number of days elapsed and the remaining shelf life without calculating the food loss index. In this case, the proposal interval determination table may be a table in which combinations of the first number of days elapsed and the remaining shelf life correspond to the proposal interval, as shown in FIG. 18 . This allows the determination unit 140 to determine a proposal interval for the first held food based on the first number of days elapsed and the remaining shelf life without calculating the food loss index. Note that FIG. 18 is a diagram illustrating an example of a proposal interval determination table for determining a proposal interval based on the first number of days elapsed and the remaining shelf life.

[0155] (Variation 2) In Variation 2, the shelf life may be changed depending on the condition of the food. The condition of the food may be determined based on an input by user U1, or may be determined by image recognition based on image data obtained by photographing the food with camera 107. This allows foods to be suggested so that they can be safely consumed even when the storage conditions and deterioration rates differ.

[0156] (Variation 3) In the above embodiment, the determination unit 140 determines the proposal interval so that it becomes shorter as the shelf life becomes shorter, but this is not limited to this. The proposal interval may be determined so that it becomes shorter as the shelf life becomes longer. This makes it easier for foods with long shelf lives to be proposed at short proposal intervals, and can encourage the user to consume the food while it is still fresh.

[0157] (Variation 4) In the above embodiment, the held food information is generated for each type of food. However, this is not limiting. The held food information may be generated for each food storage method. Examples of storage methods include storage in the refrigerator compartment, storage in the freezer compartment, storage at room temperature, etc. In this case, the number of days that can be stored may be set according to the storage method. For example, the number of days that can be stored may be set longer for storage in the freezer compartment than for storage in the refrigerator compartment.

[0158] (Variation 5) In the above embodiment, the shelf life may be changed in response to an input by user U1. In this case, food suggestions may be made based on both the shelf life before the change and the shelf life after the change. When food suggestions are made based on both shelf life, a display instruction may be given so that information indicating whether the suggestion is based on the shelf life determined by the food suggestion device 100 or the shelf life set by user U1 is presented together with a prompt to encourage food consumption. For example, a suggestion based on the shelf life determined by the food suggestion device 100 may include a message such as "Why not try a recipe for onions that are close to their expiration date?". Furthermore, for example, a suggestion based on the shelf life set by user U1 may include a message such as "Why not try a recipe for onions that are close to their expiration date that you set?"

[0159] (Variation 6) In the above embodiment, the held food information may be generated according to the preferences, seasonal periods, production areas, producers, etc. preset by user U1. In this case, the related information for calculating the food loss index or the suggested interval determination table may be determined according to the preferences, seasonal periods, production areas, producers, etc. preset by user U1.

[0160] (Variation 7) In the above embodiment, the suggested foods are presented by the display unit 180. However, the suggested foods may be presented by voice. In addition, the reasons for the suggestions may also be presented by voice.

[0161] (Variation 8) In the above embodiment, a recommendation is made to encourage consumption of food products whose best-before or use-by dates are approaching, but food products whose best-before or use-by dates have passed may also be presented.

[0162] FIG. 19 is a diagram showing another example of a screen displayed on the display unit in response to a presentation instruction.

[0163] Screen 310 presents foods whose expiration dates have passed. Screen 310 includes icon 311 indicating that the expiration date of eggplant has passed. For example, assume that the food loss index for eggplant is greater than 1.0. As shown in FIG. 19 , icon 301 is displayed in a manner indicating that the food loss index for eggplant is within a range greater than 1.0. In this way, the suggestion interval for screen 310 including icon 311 for foods whose expiration dates have passed may be set to 0 days. In other words, screen 310 may be displayed every day until the foods whose expiration dates have passed are consumed or disposed of.

[0164] (Other Embodiments) In the above-described embodiments, each component may be configured with dedicated hardware, or may be realized by executing a software program suitable for each component. Each component may be realized by a program execution unit such as a CPU or processor reading and executing a software program recorded on a recording medium such as a hard disk or semiconductor memory.

[0165] Each component may be a circuit (or integrated circuit). These circuits may form a single circuit as a whole, or each may be a separate circuit. Each of these circuits may be a general-purpose circuit or a dedicated circuit.

[0166] Furthermore, the general or specific aspects of the present disclosure may be realized as a system, an apparatus, a method, an integrated circuit, a computer program, or a non-transitory recording medium such as a computer-readable CD-ROM, or as any combination of a system, an apparatus, a method, an integrated circuit, a computer program, and a computer-readable non-transitory recording medium.

[0167] For example, the present disclosure may be realized as a food recommendation method executed by a food recommendation device (computer or DSP), or as a program for causing a computer or DSP to execute the food recommendation method.

[0168] In the above-described embodiments, the processes executed by a specific processing unit may be executed by another processing unit. In addition, the order of the processes in the operation of the food recommendation device described in the above-described embodiments may be changed, or the processes may be executed in parallel.

[0169] In addition, this disclosure also includes forms obtained by applying various modifications to each embodiment that a person skilled in the art would think of, or forms realized by arbitrarily combining the components and functions of each embodiment within the scope of this disclosure.

[0170] The present disclosure is useful as a food recommendation device that can encourage a user to consume food in a planned manner.

[0171] 1 Food recommendation system 11 to 15 Food 50 Communication network 100, 200 Food recommendation device 101, 201 Processor 102, 202 Main memory 103, 203 Storage 104, 204 Communication IF 105, 205 Input IF 106, 206 Display 107 Camera 110, 410 Input reception unit 120, 220 Management unit 130, 230 Storage period DB 131, 231 Held food DB 140, 240 Determination unit 150, 250 Proposal interval DB 160, 260 Control unit 170, 270 Proposed food DB 180, 480 Display unit 300, 310 Screen 301, 302, 311 Icon 400 Mobile terminal U1 User

Claims

1. A food recommendation device that recommends consumption of one or more food items owned by a user, a storage unit that stores held food information including first type information indicating the type of a first held food included in the one or more held foods, start date information indicating the holding start date of the first held food, and shelf life information indicating the shelf life of the first held food, and first suggested food information including second type information indicating the type of food and proposed date information indicating the proposed date on which the food of the second type information was proposed by the food suggestion device; a determination unit that determines a proposal interval until the first held food is next proposed based on a first number of days elapsed since the holding start date indicated by the start date information and the number of days that can be stored indicated by the number of days that can be stored; a control unit that determines whether to instruct the first held food to be presented based on a comparison between the proposal interval and a second number of days that have elapsed since the proposal date. Food suggestion device.

2. In determining whether to instruct the first held food to be presented, the control unit: If the second number of days since the proposal date indicated by the proposal date information corresponding to the second type information indicating the same type as the first held food is longer than the proposal interval, instruct the first held food to be presented as a proposal candidate; When the second number of elapsed days is shorter than the proposal interval, the first held food is not presented as a proposal candidate. The food suggestion device according to claim 1 .

3. The determination unit determines the proposed interval so that the proposed interval becomes shorter as the first elapsed number of days is longer. The food suggestion device according to claim 1 .

4. The determination unit determines the proposed interval so that the shorter the number of days that the storage can be performed, the shorter the proposed interval becomes. The food recommendation device according to any one of claims 1 to 3.

5. The determination unit determines the suggested interval for each of the one or more types of held food. The food recommendation device according to any one of claims 1 to 3.

6. The determination unit Calculating a food loss index indicating a degree of deterioration of the first held food based on the first elapsed days and the shelf life; The proposed interval is determined based on the food loss index and the number of days that the food can be stored. The food recommendation device according to claim 2 .

7. The one or more held foods include the first held food and a second held food, The determination unit calculates the food loss index for each of the one or more held foods, When a difference between a first food loss index of the first held food and a second food loss index of the second held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, the control unit instructs the display device to prioritize the held food having the shorter shelf life between the first held food and the second held food. The food suggestion device according to claim 6.

8. The one or more held foods include the first held food and a second held food, The determination unit calculates the food loss index for each of the one or more held foods, When a difference between a first food loss index of the first held food and a second food loss index of the second held food is equal to or less than a first threshold, the control unit instructs to present the held food having a larger held quantity among the first held food and the second held food with priority. The food suggestion device according to claim 6.

9. The determination unit calculates the food loss index for each of a plurality of held foods including the one or more held foods, The control unit determines a plurality of proposal candidates, and issues a presentation instruction such that the number of proposal candidates to be presented in a predetermined presentation area increases as the number of proposal candidates for which a food loss index greater than a second threshold value is calculated increases among the determined plurality of proposal candidates. The food suggestion device according to claim 6.

10. The control unit issues a presentation instruction to display the proposal candidates in different display modes depending on the food loss index. The food suggestion device according to claim 6.

11. the control unit instructs the user to present the proposal candidate together with a proposal reason for determining the proposal candidate; The reason for the proposal is determined according to the food loss index of the proposal candidate. The food suggestion device according to claim 6.

12. The shelf life is changed depending on the condition of the food. The food recommendation device according to any one of claims 1 to 3.

13. the storage unit further stores second suggested food information including third type information indicating a type of food and indicating that the food of the third type information is not suggested by the food suggestion device; The control unit instructs the user to present the first held food item as a recommendation candidate when the type indicated by the first type information is the same as the type indicated by the third type information. The food recommendation device according to any one of claims 1 to 3.

14. A food recommendation method using a food recommendation device that recommends consumption of one or more food items owned by a user, comprising: Acquire held food information including first type information indicating the type of first held food included in the one or more held foods, start date information indicating the holding start date of the first held food, and shelf life information indicating the shelf life of the first held food; determining a proposal interval until the next proposal of the first held food product based on a first number of days elapsed since the holding start date indicated by the start date information and the number of days that can be stored indicated by the number of days that can be stored; acquire first proposed food information including second type information indicating a type of food and proposal date information indicating a proposal date on which the food of the second type information was proposed by the food proposal device; and determining whether to instruct the first held food to be presented as a recommendation candidate based on a comparison between the recommendation interval and a second number of days elapsed since the recommendation date. Food proposal method.

15. A program for causing a computer to execute the food recommendation method according to claim 14.