ArticleJournal of animal science2020
Comparison of data analytics strategies in computer vision systems to predict pig body composition traits from 3D images.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel Method for Estimating the Body Weight and Size of Sows Using 3D Point Cloud.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Estimation of Sow Backfat Thickness Based on Machine Vision.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Benchmarking analysis of computer vision algorithms on edge devices for the real-time detection of digital dermatitis in dairy cows.Preventive veterinary medicine · 2024Article
- Pig Weight Estimation Method Based on a Framework Combining Mask R-CNN and Ensemble Regression Model.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Breeding for resilience in finishing pigs can decrease tail biting, lameness and mortality.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2024Article
- Improving Efficiency: Automatic Intelligent Weighing System as a Replacement for Manual Pig Weighing.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Prediction of the daily nutrient requirements of gestating sows based on sensor data and machine-learning algorithms.Journal of animal science · 2023Article
- A deep learning-based framework for predicting pork preference.Current research in food science · 2023Article
- Predicting ribeye area and circularity in live calves through 3D image analyses of body surface.Journal of animal science · 2022Article
- Identification of body size characteristic points based on the Mask R-CNN and correlation with body weight in Ujumqin sheep.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- ASAS-NANP SYMPOSIUM: prospects for interactive and dynamic graphics in the era of data-rich animal science1.Journal of animal science · 2021Article
- ASAS-NANP SYMPOSIUM: Applications of machine learning for livestock body weight prediction from digital images.Journal of animal science · 2021Review
- A Novel Estimation of Unobserved Pig Growth Traits for the Purposes of Precision Feeding Methods.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Image Analysis and Computer Vision Applications in Animal Sciences: An Overview.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computer vision systems (CVS) have been shown to be a powerful tool for the measurement of live pig body weight (BW) with no animal stress. With advances in precision farming, it is now possible to evaluate the growth performance of individual pigs more accurately. However, important traits such as muscle and fat deposition can still be evaluated only via ultrasound, computed tomography, or dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Therefore, the objectives of this study were: 1) to develop a CVS for prediction of live BW, muscle depth (MD), and back fat (BF) from top view 3D images of finishing pigs and 2) to compare the predictive ability of different approaches, such as traditional multiple linear regression, partial least squares, and machine learning techniques, including elastic networks, artificial neural networks, and deep learning (DL). A dataset containing over 12,000 images from 557 finishing pigs (average BW of 120 ± 12 kg) was split into training and testing sets using a 5-fold cross-validation (CV) technique so that 80% and 20% of the dataset were used for training and testing in each fold. Several image features, such as volume, area, length, widths, heights, polar image descriptors, and polar Fourier transforms, were extracted from the images and used as predictor variables in the different approaches evaluated. In addition, DL image encoders that take raw 3D images as input were also tested. This latter method achieved the best overall performance, with the lowest mean absolute scaled error (MASE) and root mean square error for all traits, and the highest predictive squared correlation (R2). The median predicted MASE achieved by this method was 2.69, 5.02, and 13.56, and R2 of 0.86, 0.50, and 0.45, for BW, MD, and BF, respectively. In conclusion, it was demonstrated that it is possible to successfully predict BW, MD, and BF via CVS on a fully automated setting using 3D images collected in farm conditions. Moreover, DL algorithms simplified and optimized the data analytics workflow, with raw 3D images used as direct inputs, without requiring prior image processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.