Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40519615›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science and technology2025

Automatic detection of trapping events of postnatal piglets in loose housing pen: comparison of YOLO versions 4, 5, and 8.

Taeyong Yun, Jinsul Kim, Jinhyeon Yun, Tai-Won Um

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science and technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Taeyong YunDepartment of Data Science, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7669-9073
Jinsul KimSchool of Electronics and Computer Engineering, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2294-3969
Jinhyeon YunDepartment of Data Science, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0697-0679
Tai-Won UmDepartment of Data Science, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4922-1774

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the pig industry has experienced an alarming surge in piglet mortality shortly after farrowing due to crushing by the sow. This issue has been exacerbated by the adoption of hyperprolific sows and the transition to loose housing pens, adversely affecting both animal welfare and productivity. In response to these challenges, researchers have progressively turned to artificial intelligence of things (AIoT) to address various issues within the livestock sector. The primary objective of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of different versions of object detection algorithms, aiming to identify the optimal AIoT system for monitoring piglet crushing events based on performance and practicality. The methodology involved extracting relevant footage depicting instances of piglet crushing from recorded farrowing pen videos, which were subsequently condensed into 2-3 min edited clips. These clips were categorized into three classes: no trapping, trapping, and crushing. Data augmentation techniques, including rotation, flipping, and adjustments to saturation and contrast, were applied to enhance the dataset. This study employed three deep learning object recognition algorithms-- You Only Look Once (YOLO)v4-Tiny, YOLOv5s and YOLOv8s--followed by a performance analysis. The average precision (AP) for trapping detection across the models yielded values of 0.963 for YOLOv4-Tiny, and 0.995 for both YOLOv5s, and YOLOv8s. Notably, trapping detection performance was similar between YOLOv5s and YOLOv8s. However, YOLOv5s proved to be the best choice considering its model size of 13.6 MB compared to YOLOv4-Tiny's 22.4 MB and YOLOv8's 21.4 MB. Considering both performance metrics and model size, YOLOv5s emerges as the most suitable model for detecting trapping within an AIoT framework. Future endeavors may leverage this research to refine and expand the scope of AIoT applications in addressing challenges within the pig industry, ultimately contributing to advancements in both animal husbandry practices and technological solutions.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence of things (AIoT)Deep learning object-detection algorithmPiglet crushingTrappingYou Only Look Once (YOLO)

Identifiers

PMID40519615
PMCPMC12159704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.