Analisi della ripetibilità di test inerenti alcuni tratti comportamentali dei cani destinati all’addestramento alla guida, eseguiti avarie età
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RIASSUNTO Nel presente studio vengono presi in esame 34 cani (17 di razza Labrador e 17 di razza Golden Retriever) di proprietà della Scuola Nazionale Cani Guida per Ciechi di Scandicci (SNCG). Durante il loro primo anno di vita sono stati sottoposti a specifici test di valutazione attitudinale ai fini dell’addestramento alla guida di persone non vedenti. Tali test sono stati effettuati a determinate età (a 7 settimane, a 10 settimane ed a 6 mesi) e ciascun test è stato ripetuto a distanza di almeno una settimana (massimo tre settimane). Scopo della presente ricerca è stato quello di analizzare la ripetibilità dei test di valutazione comportamentale, come primo approccio per l’impostazione di un piano di miglioramento genetico dei cani guida per non vedenti. Per la ripetizione dei test effettuati ad 7 e a 10 settimane di età, le prove appaiate e l’analisi delle correlazioni tra gli stessi depongono per una assenza di ripetibilità dei risultati, mentre le risposte ai test nei soggetti di sei mesi di età si sono dimostrate più ripetibili; verosimilmente, il cane a sei mesi ha un carattere già definito, se pur grossolanamente, e reagisce quindi in modo costante agli stimoli esterni. Per alcuni tratti comportamentali non è stata dimostrata alcuna differenza significativa nei tre test appaiati suggerendo la possibilità di valutare certi tratti comportamentali indesiderati fin dalle prime settimane di vita, consentendo così una maggiore selezione dei cuccioli al fine di evitare inutili sprechi di risorse umane ed economiche per la Scuola Nazionale Cani Guida per Ciechi di Scandicci. SUMMARY A trial was carried out on 34 Guide Dogs (17 of Labrador breed and 17 of Golden Retriever breed) of the national Guide Dogs School of Scandicci (NGDSS). Each subjects undergoes a selection process carried out by different tests consisting of a sequence of various stimuli with the aim of assess most important behavioural characteristics according to many guide dogs Schools in the world. During the first year of their life, each dog must undergo these aptitude tests at specific ages (at seven weeks, at ten weeks and at six months of age). The aim of this research was to analyse the repeatability of each test based upon the repetition of it one week later, as first approach for the development of a breeding program for guide dogs for the blinds. For the test carried at seven and ten weeks of age, the paired trials and the analysis of the correlations between them testify an absence of a repeatability of the results, while six month of age test gave signs of increased repeatability. This finding can be justified by the fact that at six month of age dog has a more definite temperamental profile and reacts to external stimuli in a more costant way. For other behavioural characteristics there weren’t any significantly differences among the three paired tests. This findings is consistent with the possibility to highlight certain undesiderable traits at an early age of the puppies so that they can be excluded from the puppy walker program and from the training program avoiding human and economic resources waste.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".