MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410137935 · doi:10.1016/j.jafr.2025.102002

Cross temporal scale pig face recognition based on deep learning

2025· article· en· W4410137935 on OpenAlexaff
T. Luo, Cheng Wang, Dong Wang, Zihao Zhao, Hao Huang, Shuhong Zhao, Xinggang Wang, Xuewen Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agriculture and Food Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersWuhan Science and Technology Project
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceScale (ratio)Deep learningFacial recognition systemPattern recognition (psychology)Face (sociological concept)Computer scienceSpeech recognitionGeographyCartographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: Pig face recognition is a promising, non-invasive, and cost-effective method for monitoring pigs. However, rapid growth alters their appearance, challenging facial recognition. To address this, we build a cross-time-scale dataset with 33,434 images of 137 Bamaxiang pigs (26–76 days old). To validate the effectiveness of this dataset, we train and evaluat five CNN models on it. Specifically, ConvNeXt, ResNet, GoogLeNet, VGG, and MobileNet achieve accuracies of 98.6%, 97.2%, 96.6%, 93.9%, and 65%, respectively. Temporal scalability analysis show accuracy dropping from 97% to 69% as the training-test gap increased from 0 to 24 days. Besides, ResNet18 with a triplet loss function reaches 88.5% accuracy. While pig face recognition performs well, it remains highly sensitive to short-term facial changes, requiring future models to capture temporal features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agriculture and Food ResearchSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207