Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41261444›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2025

Classification of individual dairy cow behaviors using accelerometer, gyroscope, and integrated sensor models.

Khamta Pongsanun, Tadsorn Apirak, Leklerdsiriwong Aekaluck, Chunithipaisan Sanphet, Inchaisri Chaidate

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

5 authors.

Khamta PongsanunCenter of Excellence in Data Innovation for Sustainable Livestock Production, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Tadsorn ApirakCenter of Excellence in Data Innovation for Sustainable Livestock Production, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Leklerdsiriwong AekaluckCenter of Excellence in Data Innovation for Sustainable Livestock Production, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chunithipaisan SanphetDepartment of Survey Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Inchaisri ChaidateCenter of Excellence in Data Innovation for Sustainable Livestock Production, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. chaidate.i@chula.ac.th.

Funding

Program Management Unit for Competitiveness Enhancement(PMU-C) 1499287Research and Researchers for industries(RRi) PHD60I0084
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAutomated behavior monitoring is increasingly important in precision dairy farming, supporting early disease detection, welfare assessment, and productivity optimization. Although accelerometers effectively detect postural changes, they have limited capacity to capture rotational or transitional movements. Gyroscopes provide complementary angular velocity data that may enhance classification of complex behaviors. However, their combined use remains underexplored, particularly at the individual cow level. This study aims to evaluate the performance of accelerometer, gyroscope, and combined sensors models for classifying four key cow behaviors: lying, standing, eating, and walking at the individual animal level.

resultsOver 780,000 labeled observations were obtained from seven dairy cows monitored over 90 days. Lying behavior consistently produced low, stable signals across all axes of accelerometer and gyroscope, while eating showed the greatest variability, particularly along the X and Y axes. Significant axis-specific and behavior-specific differences were observed (p < 0.05), with GyroY and GyroZ capturing the highest rotational activity during eating and walking. Signal vector magnitudes effectively distinguished behaviors, with lying showing the lowest values and eating the highest. Random Forest models combining accelerometer and gyroscope data consistently outperformed single-sensor approaches, particularly for classifying lying and standing behaviors. Although eating and walking exhibited lower sensitivity, sensor fusion improved classification robustness across individuals.

conclusionThe integration of accelerometer and gyroscope data enhanced classification accuracy, particularly for static behaviors. Axis-specific signal patterns and individualized modeling revealed critical insights into behavior differentiation and cow-specific variability. These findings support the development of scalable, sensor-based monitoring systems tailored to precision livestock management.

Indexed as

AccelerometryBehavior, AnimalDairyingAnimalsCattleFemaleMonitoring, PhysiologicBehavior classificationDairy cow behaviorPrecision livestock farmingRandom forest machine learningSensor fusionTri-axial accelerometer and gyroscope

Identifiers

PMID41261444
PMCPMC12632110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.