Technical note: Assessing lameness in tie-stalls using live stall lameness scoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Video stall lameness scoring (SLS) has been shown to be comparable to video locomotion scoring for evaluating lameness in dairy cows housed in tie-stalls and may be a more practical and easier method to measure lameness in a herd. We compared live SLS to video SLS and to live locomotion scoring. A total of 685 lactating cows subsampled from 27 commercial dairy herds were examined for lameness through live and video SLS. Cows scored with the live or video SLS system were scored for 4 behavioral indicators while still in their stall: weight shifting (shift), standing on the edge of the stall (edge), uneven weight bearing while standing (rest), and uneven weight bearing while moving from side to side (uneven). Two observers live scored and video scored for SLS. Lameness prevalence from video SLS and live SLS were similar (31 vs. 30%, respectively). Prevalence of the behavioral indicators varied from 0.59 to 58.2%. Sensitivity and specificity of live SLS was calculated using video SLS as the gold standard for lameness detection in tie-stalls. Sensitivity of live SLS was 0.83 and specificity was 0.94. False positives and false negatives for lameness were 14.4 and 16.8%, respectively. When comparing the prevalence of lameness measured through video or live SLS at the herd level, live SLS for lameness was correlated to video SLS (r = 0.91) with a Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.79 (95% confidence limit = 0.73-0.84). Average exact agreement in the behavior indicators observed ranged from 80 to 100%. A subsample of 250 cows from 5 herds were scored for live SLS and live locomotion by a third observer. Intra- and interobserver reliability for live SLS and live locomotion scoring were found to have a kappa coefficient of 0.53 (95% confidence limit = 0.43-0.64) when determining a cow as lame through SLS or locomotion scoring. Live SLS was correlated with live locomotion scoring (r = 0.92). However, lameness prevalence was lower when using live SLS (28.4%) compared with locomotion scoring (38%). In summary, live SLS may be an acceptable method to replace video SLS to identify lame cows and rank tie-stall herds in terms of lameness prevalence without having to remove the cows from their stalls or view videos to score; however, it may underestimate lameness prevalence compared with locomotion scoring methods.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".