The automated analysis of clustering behaviour of piglets from thermal images in response to immune challenge by vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An automated method of estimating the spatial distribution of piglets within a pen was used to assess huddling behaviour under normal conditions and during a febrile response to vaccination. The automated method was compared with a manual assessment of clustering activity. Huddling behaviour was partly related to environmental conditions and clock time such that more huddling occurred during the night and at lower ambient air temperatures. There were no positive relationships between maximum pig temperatures and environmental conditions, suggesting that the narrow range of air temperatures in this study was not a significant factor for pig temperature. Spatial distribution affected radiated pig temperature measurements by IR thermography. Higher temperatures were recorded in groups of animals displaying huddling behaviour. Huddling behaviour was affected by febrile responses to vaccination with increased huddling occurring 3 to 8 h post-vaccination. The automated method of assessing spatial distribution from an IR image successfully identified periods of huddling associated with a febrile response, and to changing environmental temperatures. Infrared imaging could be used to quantify temperature and behaviour from the same images.
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".