MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088152240 · doi:10.4141/a02-111

Savaging behaviour in gilts and sows

2003· article· en· W2088152240 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Moira Harris, Y. Z. Li, H. W. Gonyou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsGenome Prairie
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHerdAnimal scienceBiologyIncidence (geometry)Parity (physics)Veterinary medicineMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the effects of parity, prior experience, and environmental conditions on the incidence of savaging on seven commercial farms. Results indicated that 3.40% of gilts and 1.22% of sows killed one or more piglets (P < 0.05). Fourteen percent of sows that savaged as gilts also savaged during their second farrowing, compared to 0.8% of sows that had not reviously savaged. The incidence of savaging was similar among gilts during the first (all gilt herd) and second (gilt/sow herd) farrowing cycles. Key words: Savaging, gilts, sows, pigs, maternal behaviour

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207