Comparison of parametric, orthogonal, and spline functions to model individual lactation curves for milk yield in Canadian Holsteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Test day records for milk yield of 57,390 first lactation Canadian Holsteins were analyzed with a linear model that included the fixed effects of herd-test date and days in milk (DIM) interval nested within age and calving season. Residuals from this model were analyzed as a new variable and fitted with a five parameter model, fourth-order Legendre polynomials, with linear, quadratic and cubic spline models with three knots. The fit of the models was rather poor, with about 30%–40% of the curves showing an adjusted R-square lower than 0.20 across all models. Results underline a great difficulty in modelling individual deviations around the mean curve for milk yield. However, the Ali and Schaeffer (5 parameter) model and the fourth-order Legendre polynomials were able to detect two basic shapes of individual deviations among the mean curve. Quadratic and, especially, cubic spline functions had better fitting performances but a poor predictive ability due to their great flexibility that results in an abrupt change of the estimated curve when data are missing. Parametric and orthogonal polynomials seem to be robust and affordable under this standpoint.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".