Evaluating automated infrared thermography and vulva exposure tracking as components of an estrus detection platform in a commercial dairy herd
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary objective of this study was to develop an automated infrared thermography platform (Estrus BenchMark) capable of measuring skin temperature and tail movements as a means of identifying cows in estrus. The secondary objective was to evaluate the accuracy of Estrus BenchMark to detect estrus compared to in-line milk progesterone (P4) analysis (Herd Navigator System) in a commercial dairy herd managed under a robotic milking system. Data were collected on forty-six cows from 45 to 120 d after calving. Cows were flagged in estrus when milk P4 fell below 5 ng/mL. The Estrus BenchMark true positive estrus alerts (Sensitivity; Se%) were compared to Herd Navigator System estrus alerts at different time-windows (±12 h, ±24 h, ±48 h, and ±72 h) relative to the Estrus BenchMark estrus alerts for all the estrus alerts (AE) and confidence-quality estrus (CQE; >80% quality) alerts identified by Herd Navigator System. The Estrus BenchMark captured skin temperature and tail movements resulting in vulva exposure (left tail movements, LTail; right tail movements, RTail; and pooled tail movements, PTail) for each milking event. Skin temperature tended to increase when the milk P4 concentration (Least-Squares Means ± SE) dropped for AE (estrus day [d 0]; P4; 3.51 ± 0.05 ng/mL, Skin temperature; 33.31 ± 2.38 °C) compared with d −7 (P4; 20.22 ± 0.73 ng/mL; Skin temperature: 32.05 ± 3.77 °C). The increase in skin temperature, however, was significant in cows with CQE > 80% at d 0 (32.75 ± 0.29 °C) compared to d −7 (31.80 ± 0.28 °C). The prevalence of tail movements to expose vulva was greater (P = 0.01) in AE at d 0 (LTail: 62.50%; PTail; 68.75%; and RTail: 56.25%) compared with d −7 (LTail: 18.75%; PTail: 9.37%: and RTail: 9.37%), and d +4 (LTail: 9.37%; PTail: 9.37%; and RTail: 12.5%). Moreover, the higher prevalence of tail movements at d 0 was observed in cows with CQE > 80% (LTail; 65%, PTail; 80%, and RTail; 70%) compared to those with CQE < 80%. The highest Estrus BenchMark Youden index (YJ; 0.45), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR; 9.04), and Efficiency (0.77) were achieved for AE in a ±48 h window and at ±72 h window for CQE (YJ; 0.66, DOR; 25.29, and Efficiency 0.76) relative to Herd Navigator System estrus alerts. The highest Estrus BenchMark resulted in 58% estrus detection rates for AE and 80% for cows with CQE compared to the Herd Navigator System.
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".