Technical note: Evaluation of a system for monitoring individual feeding behavior and activity in beef cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Behavioral observations are important to detect illness in beef cattle. However, traditional observation techniques are time and labor intensive and may be subjective. The objective was to validate a system for monitoring individual feeding behavior and activity in beef cattle (Fedometer [FEDO]; ENGS, Rosh Pina, Israel). Sixteen steers (initial BW ± SD = 326 ± 46 kg) were fitted with data loggers (FEDO) on their left front leg and housed in a pen with a feedbunk equipped with an antenna emitting an electromagnetic field that reached 30 ± 2 cm in front of the feedbunk. Feedbunk attendance (duration of visit and frequency of meals) measured by FEDO was compared with live observations (27 observational periods lasting between 72 and 240 min; mean 126 min). Lying time and frequency of lying bouts were compared with previously validated accelerometers fitted to the hind leg (10 steers equipped for 10 to 12 d; HOBO Pendant G Acceleration Data Logger [HOBO]; Onset Computer Corporation, Pocasset, MA). Step counts were compared with video recordings (15 observations for 6-min intervals in 6 steers). Concordance correlation coefficients (CCC), accounting for repeated measures, and limits of agreement were computed. Comparison between FEDO and observed time at the feedbunk yielded a CCC of 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-0.99). All 68 meal events observed were recorded by FEDO. However, FEDO recorded 4 meal events during the 27 observational periods that were not observed. Lying time measured by HOBO and FEDO were highly correlated (CCC = 0.98; 95% CI 0.97-0.99). However, frequency of lying bouts measured by FEDO was only moderately correlated to HOBO (CCC = 0.71; 95% CI 0.63-0.77); FEDO underestimating the number of lying bouts (on average, 0.4 fewer bouts per 6 h). Step count by FEDO was moderately correlated to video observations (CCC = 0.75; 95% CI 0.49-0.89); FEDO overestimating the number of steps (on average, 5 more steps per 6 min). In conclusion, the FEDO system accurately measured duration of feedbunk attendance, frequency of meals, and lying time. However, it overestimated the number of steps and underestimated the frequency of lying bouts.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".