Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34070579›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021

Deep Learning Classification of Canine Behavior Using a Single Collar-Mounted Accelerometer: Real-World Validation.

Robert D Chambers, Nathanael C Yoder, Aletha B Carson, Christian Junge, David E Allen, Laura M Prescott, Sophie Bradley, Garrett Wymore, Kevin Lloyd, Scott Lyle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Response of pet owners to Whistle FITFrontiers in veterinary science · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Robert D ChambersPet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9693-7767
Nathanael C YoderPet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4153-4722
Aletha B CarsonPet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2248-0565
Christian JungePet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.
David E AllenPet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.
Laura M PrescottPet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.
Sophie BradleyWALTHAM Petcare Science Institute, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire LE14 4RT, UK.
Garrett WymorePet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.
Kevin LloydPet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.
Scott LylePet Insight Project, Kinship, San Francisco, CA 94103, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9441-2828

Funding

Mars Petcare Internal
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collar-mounted canine activity monitors can use accelerometer data to estimate dog activity levels, step counts, and distance traveled. With recent advances in machine learning and embedded computing, much more nuanced and accurate behavior classification has become possible, giving these affordable consumer devices the potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of pet healthcare. Here, we describe a novel deep learning algorithm that classifies dog behavior at sub-second resolution using commercial pet activity monitors. We built machine learning training databases from more than 5000 videos of more than 2500 dogs and ran the algorithms in production on more than 11 million days of device data. We then surveyed project participants representing 10,550 dogs, which provided 163,110 event responses to validate real-world detection of eating and drinking behavior. The resultant algorithm displayed a sensitivity and specificity for detecting drinking behavior (0.949 and 0.999, respectively) and eating behavior (0.988, 0.983). We also demonstrated detection of licking (0.772, 0.990), petting (0.305, 0.991), rubbing (0.729, 0.996), scratching (0.870, 0.997), and sniffing (0.610, 0.968). We show that the devices' position on the collar had no measurable impact on performance. In production, users reported a true positive rate of 95.3% for eating (among 1514 users), and of 94.9% for drinking (among 1491 users). The study demonstrates the accurate detection of important health-related canine behaviors using a collar-mounted accelerometer. We trained and validated our algorithms on a large and realistic training dataset, and we assessed and confirmed accuracy in production via user validation.

Indexed as

accelerometeractivity monitorbehaviorcaninedeep learning

Identifiers

PMID34070579
PMCPMC8228965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.