Neat. I'm trying to compress recipes into little schematics https://leontrolski.github.io/recipes.html
The flowchart factorio of food preparation. Neat
All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
141–150 of 181 posts
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#142See [1] for a demo, seemingly of an older iteration of what this paper describes. I was curious what ingredients the demo had selected (1032 available vs 1790 this paper selects) so I tried some obscure ingredients from "Organum: Nature, Texture, Intensity, Purity" by Peter Gilmore[2] (known for Quay restaurant in Sydney, Australia). It's got some adventurous ingredients such as juniper berry, macadamia nut, nigella…
> "pumpkin"--that is "squash", so there are some localisation improvements which could be made to improve British and American English use That's a much bigger issue than just wording differences. As an American, there's several different squashes in common use of which pumpkin is only one. (acorn, butternut, and spaghetti are the ones I'm thinking of; zucchini if you want to be pedantic).
In BrE too, not sure why that was related to regional difference if they're called pumpkins there too.
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#143These comments are so filled with cool projects and visualizations I’ll throw my own out there: Trying to generate non-slop, print-worthy recipe books for different diaspora communities. www.robotbookclub.com I’m pretty sure the recipes have surpassed slop. The photos are pretty close. The layouts, intros, and “chef photos” need a lot of work though.
It is good enough to have much fun reading it.
About chef photos, in Cook French in America, page 11: no eggs on a breakfast tartine.
As a French, I would like the French version.
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#144Neat. I'm trying to compress recipes into little schematics https://leontrolski.github.io/recipes.html
This is like "Picture Cook: See, Make, Eat": https://www.amazon.com/Picture-Cook-Katie-Shelly/dp/16460416...
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The trouble I find with LLM generated recipes is they miss the nuance of the technique. Often the success of a depends on a single step or ratio. For instance “fried chicken” has a million incarnations the world over, but you can’t just average out the recipes and end up with tasty fried chicken. Specify what technique you want. Explicitly say you want to correctly follow all the techniques of the chosen cuisine. A…
> All the LLMs have ingested nearly every cookbook ever made, across multiple languages. That's not a positive thing, good recipe developers are Rare . For every recipe that's been meticulously tested and documented there are 1000 that haven't been. Many cookbooks are riddled with errors.
Come on now how bad could it be? Wisdom of crowds and all that...
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd11gzejgz4o
Oh. Oh no.
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
The space of palatable human food is small. There are only a few thousand ingredients and a few thousand preparation techniques. This could easily be compressed at high fidelity into a model.
Citations needed
Less than 7 thousand ingredients [1]. Even if you think it's way more than that on account of underrepresented cultures (which does not seem to be the case), it's still just a few thousand. Most cuisines use around 50 of them.
[1] https://flowingdata.com/2018/09/18/cuisine-ingredients/
Total number of techniques should be in the hundreds (not thousands), to be generous, even accounting for historical / prehistorical techniques.
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#147See [1] for a demo, seemingly of an older iteration of what this paper describes. I was curious what ingredients the demo had selected (1032 available vs 1790 this paper selects) so I tried some obscure ingredients from "Organum: Nature, Texture, Intensity, Purity" by Peter Gilmore[2] (known for Quay restaurant in Sydney, Australia). It's got some adventurous ingredients such as juniper berry, macadamia nut, nigella…
> "pumpkin"--that is "squash", so there are some localisation improvements which could be made to improve British and American English use That's a much bigger issue than just wording differences. As an American, there's several different squashes in common use of which pumpkin is only one. (acorn, butternut, and spaghetti are the ones I'm thinking of; zucchini if you want to be pedantic).
Agreed. My comment was to highlight that if a recipe for a soup just says "1kg squash", that could mean anything from "Cucurbita maxima subsp. maxima var. Jarrahdale"[1] through to "Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo var. recticollis"[2], with vastly different outcomes for the soup.
The model under the hood should probably have ingredients as parts of a taxon, then have common names mapped (many:many) to these parts of taxons. Then it's necessary to have abstract classifications such as "pumpkin seed" which could be defined as the seed of multiple different taxons, which for some recipes, may not matter which one of 5 Cucurbita subspecies is used. That way if someone types "squash" or "pumpkin seed" they get asked to clarify what they mean, which will change quite a bit depending on locality of the person being asked.
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
That does represent 70% or so of the current world population. It isn't 100% coverage but it is most of the many of the biggest groups. It is missing the Italian, Japanese, Greek and Mexican cooking - that are incredibly popular worldwide and it is incomplete without them, and nothing from Africa at all or Middle East.
> It is missing the Italian, Japanese, Greek and Mexican cooking - that are incredibly popular worldwide and it is incomplete without them, and nothing from Africa at all or Middle East. That's overstating it. There are certainly English-language sources describing Italian, Japanese, Greek, Mexican, African, and Middle Eastern recipes. They're likely not the most authoritative sources, but it's not as if I'd expect t…
Ah. So it was English language sources and not English cooking. Got it.
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#149I saw this on X/Twitter. I do not believe that human cooking, and all of its techniques and ingredients and the various ways that things can be prepared in different cultural contexts can be compressed in to 2 megabytes. It is sort of like saying here is a 1GB model that can do tool calling and coding and then you try it out and it barely functions. Yes, it technically is a 1GB coding model, but it isn't a good one.
The space of palatable human food is small. There are only a few thousand ingredients and a few thousand preparation techniques. This could easily be compressed at high fidelity into a model.
There are only a “few thousand ingredients” seems like orders of magnitude off
Re: All of human cooking compressed into 2 megabytes
#150>from 11 sources spanning seven languages, English, Chinese, Russian, Vietnamese, Spanish, Turkish, Indonesian, German, and Indian-English So hardly "all of human cooking"...
That does represent 70% or so of the current world population. It isn't 100% coverage but it is most of the many of the biggest groups. It is missing the Italian, Japanese, Greek and Mexican cooking - that are incredibly popular worldwide and it is incomplete without them, and nothing from Africa at all or Middle East.
>That does represent 70% or so of the current world population.
Cooking is about different cuisines and recipes of important, not population count.
Italy is "just" 60M people but has huge cuisine and big influence in global tastes. France too. Britain is similar sized, and Congo is 2x that, but none has much of a cuisine. Peru on the other hand, is half that, but a great cuisine.