Can generative AI reliably estimate the environmental impact of diets? Evidence from four dietary scenarios

Purpose The purpose is the study was to evaluate the accuracy and consistency of artificial intelligence (AI) models in estimating environmental parameters of different diet types. Design/methodology/approach A model performance evaluation study was conducted using four generative AI systems (ChatGPT-5.2, Gemini-3, Grok-4.1 and DeepSeek-V3.2). Four standardized dietary scenarios were developed (current diet, model diet, lacto-ovo vegetarian diet and vegan diet), each providing 2000 kcal/day. Carbon footprint (CF), water footprint (WF), energy footprint (EF) and land use were calculated using life cycle assessment–based databases and used as reference values. Each AI model was queried three times using the same standardized prompt and mean outputs were analyzed. Findings Significant differences between AI-generated estimates and reference values were observed across most dietary scenarios and sustainability parameters (p < 0.05). ChatGPT-5.2 demonstrated the best overall performance, particularly for WF [mean absolute error (MAE): 124.19; absolute error: 6.11%] and EF (MAE: 5.46; absolute error: 13.82%). DeepSeek-V3.2 showed the lowest prediction error for CF (MAE: 0.25; absolute error: 12.18%) and land use (MAE: 1.12; absolute error: 23.99%). In contrast, Grok-4.1 exhibited the highest deviations, with CF errors reaching 48.38% and substantial overestimations of land use (absolute error: 199.78%). Large deviations were particularly evident for WF and land use across several models. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study provides one of the first comparative evaluations of generative AI models in estimating environmental sustainability indicators of dietary patterns. By benchmarking AI-generated outputs against life cycle assessment–based reference values across standardized diet scenarios, the study offers new evidence regarding the reliability and limitations of AI in sustainable nutrition research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nutrition & Food Science
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/nfs-03-2026-0117
Primary Topic
Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can generative AI reliably estimate the environmental impact of diets? Evidence from four dietary scenarios

Hati̇ce Merve Bayram, Arda Öztürkcan
Nutrition & Food Science
Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
article

Can generative AI reliably estimate the environmental impact of diets? Evidence from four dietary scenarios

Hati̇ce Merve Bayram, Arda Öztürkcan
article en

Abstract

Purpose The purpose is the study was to evaluate the accuracy and consistency of artificial intelligence (AI) models in estimating environmental parameters of different diet types. Design/methodology/approach A model performance evaluation study was conducted using four generative AI systems (ChatGPT-5.2, Gemini-3, Grok-4.1 and DeepSeek-V3.2). Four standardized dietary scenarios were developed (current diet, model diet, lacto-ovo vegetarian diet and vegan diet), each providing 2000 kcal/day. Carbon footprint (CF), water footprint (WF), energy footprint (EF) and land use were calculated using life cycle assessment–based databases and used as reference values. Each AI model was queried three times using the same standardized prompt and mean outputs were analyzed. Findings Significant differences between AI-generated estimates and reference values were observed across most dietary scenarios and sustainability parameters (p < 0.05). ChatGPT-5.2 demonstrated the best overall performance, particularly for WF [mean absolute error (MAE): 124.19; absolute error: 6.11%] and EF (MAE: 5.46; absolute error: 13.82%). DeepSeek-V3.2 showed the lowest prediction error for CF (MAE: 0.25; absolute error: 12.18%) and land use (MAE: 1.12; absolute error: 23.99%). In contrast, Grok-4.1 exhibited the highest deviations, with CF errors reaching 48.38% and substantial overestimations of land use (absolute error: 199.78%). Large deviations were particularly evident for WF and land use across several models. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study provides one of the first comparative evaluations of generative AI models in estimating environmental sustainability indicators of dietary patterns. By benchmarking AI-generated outputs against life cycle assessment–based reference values across standardized diet scenarios, the study offers new evidence regarding the reliability and limitations of AI in sustainable nutrition research.

Nutrition & Food Science
İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi (TR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon