Object detection and tracking using a high-performance artificial intelligence-based 3D depth camera: towards early detection of African swine fever
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inspection of livestock farms using surveillance cameras is emerging as a means of early detection of transboundary animal disease such as African swine fever (ASF). Object tracking, a developing technology derived from object detection aims to the consistent identification of individual objects in farms. OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted as a preliminary investigation for practical application to livestock farms. With the use of a high-performance artificial intelligence (AI)-based 3D depth camera, the aim is to establish a pathway for utilizing AI models to perform advanced object tracking. METHODS: Multiple crossovers by two humans will be simulated to investigate the potential of object tracking. Inspection of consistent identification will be the evidence of object tracking after crossing over. Two AI models, a fast model and an accurate model, were tested and compared with regard to their object tracking performance in 3D. Finally, the recording of pig pen was also processed with aforementioned AI model to test the possibility of 3D object detection. RESULTS: Both AI successfully processed and provided a 3D bounding box, identification number, and distance away from camera for each individual human. The accurate detection model had better evidence than the fast detection model on 3D object tracking and showed the potential application onto pigs as a livestock. CONCLUSIONS: Preparing a custom dataset to train AI models in an appropriate farm is required for proper 3D object detection to operate object tracking for pigs at an ideal level. This will allow the farm to smoothly transit traditional methods to ASF-preventing precision livestock farming.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".