Application of pig growth models in commercial pork production
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pig growth models can be useful tools for identifying optimum management strategies for individual grower-finisher pig units, by integrating knowledge of nutrient utilization for growth and animal-environment interactions into one system. In addition, these models can be used to demonstrate basic principles of nutrient utilization for growth in the pig, to examine “what-if” scenarios, to aid in the development of pig breeding programs and to develop effective research programs. Models used in commercial pork production should represent the biology of growth in the pig and should be flexible, so that they can be focused easily on the needs and special conditions pertaining to particular growing–finishing pig units. For proper application of pig growth models in practice, pig units should be characterized reasonably accurately. This applies in particular to the upper limit to body protein deposition that pigs can achieve under practical conditions, feed intake at various stages of growth and the alternative feeding strategies that can be considered. Some illustrative examples of the commercial application of a pig growth model under Canadian conditions are provided. Key words: Pig, growth, models, application
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it