A Survey on Using of Farrowing Accommodation and Farrowing Crate in Swine Farm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This survey was carried out to investigate the dimensions of farrowing accommodation and farrowing crate by types. Farrowing crates are used to prevent the crushing death in the swine industry generally but farrowing crates include many problems in the animal welfare viewpoint: e.g. restriction of movements and maternal instincts. Therefore, the studies of alternative systems have been discussed for a while in U.K., U.S.A. and Canada. We surveyed eight farms for about eight months. To accurately compare the farrowing housing, small scale swine farms (3,000hd or less) were excluded from all data in this survey. Lactating accommodations were divided into vertical lactating accommodation type and diagonal accommodation type, and farrowing crates were divided into vertical bar type and horizontal bar type. In this survey, nipple waterer, partial slotted floor and total slotted floor were 80%, 40% and 60% respectively, and the lactating accommodations' dimensions ranged from 3.90 to . We believe that these data of the survey contribute to develop alternative systems and then contribute to improve the animal welfare in Korea.
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 | 0.001 | 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".