MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404603611 · doi:10.1186/s40317-024-00389-8

Virtual fencing in remote boreal forests: performance of commercially available GPS collars for free-ranging cattle

2024· article· en· W4404603611 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Biotelemetry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHøgskolen i InnlandetNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsFencingGlobal Positioning SystemRangingTaigaRemote sensingBiologyEcologyGeographyEngineeringComputer scienceTelecommunicationsGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The use of virtual fencing in cattle farming is beneficial due to its flexibility, not fragmenting the landscape or restricting access like physical fences. Using GPS (Global Positioning System) technology, virtual fence units emit an audible signal and a low-energy electric shock when crossing a predefined border. In large remote grazing areas and complex terrains, where the performance of the GPS units can be affected by landscape structure, increased positioning errors can lead to unnecessary shocks to the animals leading to animal welfare concerns. This study aimed to explore factors affecting the GPS performance of commercially available virtual fence collars for cattle (NoFence©), both using static tests and mobile tests, i.e., when deployed on free-ranging cattle. Results The static tests revealed generally high fix success rates (% successful positioning attempts), and a lower success rate at four of 30 test locations was most likely due to a lack in GSM (Global System for Mobile communications) coverage. On average the GPS precision and accuracy errors were 3.3 m ± 2.5 SD and 4.6 m ± 3.2 SD, respectively. We found strong evidence that the GPS precision and accuracy errors increased errors under closed canopies. We also found evidence for an effect of the sky-view on the GPS performance, although at a lesser extent than canopy. The direction of the accuracy error in the Cartesian plane was not uniform, but biased, depending on the aspect of the test locations. With an average of 10.8 m ± 6.8 SD, the accuracy error of the mobile tests was more than double that of the static tests. Furthermore, we found evidence that more rugged landscapes resulted in higher GPS accuracy errors. However, the error from mobile tests was not affected by canopy cover, sky-view, or cattle behaviors. Conclusions This study showed that GPS performance can be negatively affected by landscape complexity, such as increased ruggedness and covered habitats, resulting in reduced virtual fence effectiveness and potential welfare concerns for cattle. These issues can be mitigated through proper pasture planning, such as avoiding rugged areas for the virtual fence border.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it