MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019259527 · doi:10.1080/09064700802660679

Behaviour of piglets weaned at three or six weeks of age

2009· article· en· W2019259527 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Devillers, C. Farmer

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A – Animal Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeaningAnimal scienceCreep feedingIncidence (geometry)MedicineBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this experiment was to compare behaviour of piglets weaned and mixed at 21±1 (W21, n=81) or 43±1 (W43, n=70) days of age. Piglets were observed two days before weaning (D-2), just after weaning and mixing (D0) and 24 hours later (D1). Time spent feeding was lower on D0 compared to D1 in both treatment, but was lower in W21 than in W43 piglets (P<0.05). On D0, W21 piglets were less active than W43 piglets (P<0.001). Accordingly, between D-2 and D0, W43 piglets increased (P<0.001) time spent in aggression, exploration and locomotion. Conversely, W21 piglets were more active than W43 piglets on D1 (P<0.01). Timing of behaviour relative to weaning day differed between treatments; W21 piglets were more apathetic than W43 piglets just after weaning indicating a delay in the reaction of younger piglets to weaning and mixing. W21 piglets also had a greater and longer decrease in post-weaning eating incidence than W43 piglets, which is likely due to both older age and previous creep feed experience.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A – Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207