Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39409770›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Programming and Setting Up the Object Detection Algorithm YOLO to Determine Feeding Activities of Beef Cattle: A Comparison between YOLOv8m and YOLOv10m.

Pablo Guarnido-Lopez, John-Fredy Ramirez-Agudelo, Emmanuel Denimal, Mohammed Benaouda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Pablo Guarnido-LopezInstitut Agro Dijon, 26 bd Docteur Petitjean, 21079 Dijon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5013-0888
John-Fredy Ramirez-AgudeloGrupo de Investigación en Ciencias Agrarias-GRICA, Escuela de Producción Animal, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellin 050010, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-2169-7260
Emmanuel DenimalInstitut Agro Dijon, 26 bd Docteur Petitjean, 21079 Dijon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4828-1476
Mohammed BenaoudaInstitut Agro Dijon, 26 bd Docteur Petitjean, 21079 Dijon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0143-7007

Funding

APISGENE EPI2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study highlights the importance of monitoring cattle feeding behavior using the YOLO algorithm for object detection. Videos of six Charolais bulls were recorded on a French farm, and three feeding behaviors (biting, chewing, visiting) were identified and labeled using Roboflow. YOLOv8 and YOLOv10 were compared for their performance in detecting these behaviors. YOLOv10 outperformed YOLOv8 with slightly higher precision, recall, mAP50, and mAP50-95 scores. Although both algorithms demonstrated similar overall accuracy (around 90%), YOLOv8 reached optimal training faster and exhibited less overfitting. Confusion matrices indicated similar patterns of prediction errors for both versions, but YOLOv10 showed better consistency. This study concludes that while both YOLOv8 and YOLOv10 are effective in detecting cattle feeding behaviors, YOLOv10 exhibited superior average performance, learning rate, and speed, making it more suitable for practical field applications.

Indexed as

beef cattlecomputer visionfeeding activitiesprecision livestock farmingYOLO

Identifiers

PMID39409770
PMCPMC11476086

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.