Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42651906›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Head-Body-Tail Segmentation of Poultry 3D Point Clouds Under Different Annotation Budgets: A Comparison of PCA-Based Rules and PointNet++-Based Methods.

Jianchao Yu, Hongyu Ding, Wentao Bi, Peiyi Lin, Xiaoze Yu, Tingting Jiang, Lizhe Ma, Haikun Zheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Jianchao YuSchool of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, China.
Hongyu DingSchool of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, China.
Wentao BiSchool of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, China.
Peiyi LinSchool of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, China.
Xiaoze YuCollege of Engineering, Inner Mongolia Minzu University, Tongliao 028000, China.
Tingting JiangSchool of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, China.
Lizhe MaSchool of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, China.
Haikun ZhengSchool of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3383-1877

Funding

Guangdong Ocean University CXXL2025261Guangdong Ocean University YJR24018the Guangdong Provincial Association for Science and Technology Youth Science and Technology Talent Cultivation Program SKXRC2026532
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Head-body-tail segmentation of poultry 3D point clouds is an underexplored task in precision poultry phenotyping. This study constructs a segmentation-oriented evaluation setting to examine how supervision source and annotation budget affect the relative performance of a principal component analysis (PCA)-based geometric rule and PointNet++-based segmentation methods. The evaluation setting was derived from a previously published single-view poultry point-cloud dataset originally collected for body-weight prediction, to which point-wise anatomical annotations, PCA-derived pseudo-labels, fixed data partitions, and a 500-sample manually annotated test set were added for the present segmentation task. The results show that the PCA Rule achieved the best performance under pseudo-label supervision, indicating its value as a strong low-cost baseline when no human-annotated training labels are available. With increasing annotation budgets, learning-based methods progressively surpassed the rule-based baseline, while the performance gain became marginal beyond 1000 annotated samples. A cost-performance analysis further shows that PCA-based geometric partitioning provides a highly efficient solution in low annotation scenarios, whereas learning-based methods become more advantageous when moderate human supervision is available. As auxiliary application validation, the weight-regression experiments showed that anatomical decomposition did not outperform the complete whole-body representation under the present data and model settings. These findings provide empirical evidence on the relative behavior of geometric and learning-based segmentation methods under different annotation conditions and establish a reproducible evaluation basis for subsequent poultry point-cloud part segmentation studies.

Indexed as

3D point cloudannotation budgethead–body–tail segmentationPCA rulePointNet++poultry

Identifiers

PMID42651906
PMCPMC13508931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.