How Does On-farm Nursery Pig Approachability Pre- and Post-vaccination?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare live and digital methodologies to measure nursery pig approachability pre- and post-vaccination. A total of 149 pens housing approximately 19 barrows and gilts/pen (a mix of approximately 50% barrows and 50% gilts; 0.3 m2/pig) were used. Pigs were approximately 6 weeks of age. The pen applied injection treatments were (1) Ingelvac CircoFLEX®/Ingelvac MycoFLEX® vaccine, (2) Circumvent® PCVM vaccine (3) Saline. Pre-injection were conducted at 1600h the day before injections were administered. Pigs received their treatments at 1000h on the consecutive day and post-injection was conducted, 6 h after treatments were administered and 24 h after pre-injection observations. An animal-human interaction tests was completed at pre- and post-injection time points using a live- and digital image methodology. The experimental unit was the pen of pigs. The statistical model evaluating methodologies used PROC GLIMMIX. A P ≤ 0.05 value was considered to be significant. There were no pre- or post-injection approach and not differences comparing the live and digital image evaluation methodologies. In conclusion, the live observation information is very useful when considering a real-time human-animal based measure during an on-farm assessment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".