2021
DOI: 10.1093/jas/skab206
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Disentangling data dependency using cross-validation strategies to evaluate prediction quality of cattle grazing activities using machine learning algorithms and wearable sensor data

Abstract: Wearable sensors have been explored as an alternative for real-time monitoring of cattle feeding behavior in grazing systems. To evaluate the performance of predictive models such as machine learning (ML) techniques, data cross-validation (CV) approaches are often employed. However, due to data dependencies and confounding effects, poorly performed validation strategies may significantly inflate the prediction quality. In this context, our objective was to evaluate the effect of different CV strategies on the … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the first approach, an animal-based split [ 62 ] was chosen, meaning that all observations on an individual cow were either placed within the training dataset or test dataset. The dataset was randomly split by animal into a training dataset containing 80% of the records and a test dataset consisting of the remaining 20%.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the first approach, an animal-based split [ 62 ] was chosen, meaning that all observations on an individual cow were either placed within the training dataset or test dataset. The dataset was randomly split by animal into a training dataset containing 80% of the records and a test dataset consisting of the remaining 20%.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, validation B assessed how the model would perform when predicting weekly average DMI for new cows. Data dependencies between calibration and test sets, which were reported when animals from the same herds are included in both calibration and test data sets, may inflate prediction performance (e.g., Wang and Bovenhuis, 2019;Coelho Ribeiro et al, 2021). However, this is not always the case, as in study by Lahart et al (2019), where the average accuracy of DMI prediction in test sets using only MIRS and MIRS combined with MY, F%, P%, BW, stage of lactation and parity, using within herd and across-herd crossvalidations, were 0.69, 0.87, 0.55, and 0.80, respectively.…”
Section: Cross-validation To Assess Model Robustnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…And, the significance test based on p value faces a crisis of duplication, that is, the irreproducibility of research results. Strict and systematic use of machine learning cross-validation technology [ 44 ] can provide great potential for realizing the reproducibility of psychological research. Technology-based machine learning can construct learning models from massive amounts of data, more accurately identify the underlying laws of the data, and have stronger generalization capabilities.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%