Experience with a Test-Day Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Test-Day Model is a 12-trait random regression animal model in which traits are milk, fat, and protein test-day yields, and somatic cell scores on test days within each of first three lactations. Test-day records from later lactations are not used. Random regressions (genetic and permanent environmental) were based on Wilmink's three parameter function that includes an intercept, regression on days in milk, and regression on an exponential function to the power -0.05 times days in milk. The model was applied to over 22 million test-day records of over 1.4 million cows in seven dairy breeds for cows first calving since 1988. A theoretical comparison of test-day model to 305-d complete lactation animal model is given. Each animal in an analysis receives 36 additive genetic solutions (12 traits by three regression coefficients), and these are combined to give one estimated breeding value (EBV) for each of milk, fat, and protein yields, average daily somatic cell score and milk yield persistency (for bulls only). Correlation of yield EBV with previous 305-d lactation model EBV for bulls was 0.97 and for cows was 0.93 (Holsteins). A question is whether EBV for yield traits for each lactation should be combined into one overall EBV, and if so, what method to combine them. Implementation required development of new methods for approximation of reliabilities of EBV, inclusion of cows without test day records in analysis, but which were still alive and had progeny with test-day records, adjustments for heterogeneous herd-test date variances, and international comparisons. Efforts to inform the dairy industry about changes in EBV due to the model and recovering information needed to explain changes in specific animals' EBV are significant challenges. The Canadian dairy industry will require a year or more to become comfortable with the test-day model and to realize the impact it could have on selection decisions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".