CageView: A Smart Food Control and Monitoring System for Phenotypical Research In Vivo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present work introduces an automated and smart system (named CageView) used to monitor a mouse, detect motion, and control access to food in accordance with experimental schedules. We describe the components of the CageView platform and give a summarized description on how we employed a convolutional neural network to detect and recognize a mouse in real time before presenting the results of a case study. In particular, CageView is a programmable and remotely operable system such that (1) an experimenter at a remote workstation may set up a feeding and fasting schedule that allows feeding and fasting without requiring the physical presence of a staff member, (2) the experimenter can control access to food in real time regardless of the preset schedule, (3) the experimenter has real-time access to a live video feed to assess the mouse, (4) an artificial intelligence system tracks the mouse’s location and physical activity, and (5) a record is kept of activity, which can be displayed as a 2D representation of mouse movement or a histogram showing mouse movement in 15-min blocks for the duration of the experiment.
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".