MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085096272 · doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2361

Technical note: Validation of a system for monitoring rumination in dairy cows

2009· article· en· W2085096272 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEffects of Environmental Stressors on Livestock
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFreie Universität BerlinNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsRuminationDairy cattleAnimal scienceFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased rumination in dairy cattle has been associated with increased saliva production and improved rumen health. Most estimates of rumination are based on direct visual observations. Recently, an electronic system was developed that allows for automated monitoring of rumination in cattle. The objective was to validate the data generated by this electronic (Hi-Tag, SCR Engineers Ltd., Netanya, Israel) rumination monitoring system. Assessments of 2 independent observers were highly correlated (r = 0.99, n = 23), indicating that direct human observations were suitable as the reference method. Measures from the Hi-Tag electronic system were validated by comparing values with those from a human observer for fifty-one 2-h observation periods from 27 Holstein cows. Rumination times (35.1 +/- 3.2 min) from the electronic system were highly correlated with those from direct observation (r = 0.93, R(2) = 0.87, n = 51), indicating that the electronic system was an accurate tool for monitoring this behavior in dairy cows.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.249 · 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