2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2016.06.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predicting farrowing of sows housed in crates and pens using accelerometers and CUSUM charts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
19
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
3
19
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Instead, we decided to mainly evaluate the performance of the algorithm on the basis of the duration between the time when an alarm was generated and the onset of farrowing, similar to Traulsen et al [17] and on the basis of the associated distribution of alarms. In our opinion, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity as measures of algorithm performance are difficult to interpret when it comes to farrowing prediction, especially when different authors use various definitions of "true positive" alarms [13,14,23] and, accordingly, there is no consensus at what time before farrowing "true positive" alarm occurs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Instead, we decided to mainly evaluate the performance of the algorithm on the basis of the duration between the time when an alarm was generated and the onset of farrowing, similar to Traulsen et al [17] and on the basis of the associated distribution of alarms. In our opinion, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity as measures of algorithm performance are difficult to interpret when it comes to farrowing prediction, especially when different authors use various definitions of "true positive" alarms [13,14,23] and, accordingly, there is no consensus at what time before farrowing "true positive" alarm occurs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This alarm could be interpreted as an indication that nest-building behaviour had ending. Contrary to Manteuffel et al [23] and Pastell et al [14] we decided not to use accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity as measures of performance of the algorithm that was developed in this research. Instead, we decided to mainly evaluate the performance of the algorithm on the basis of the duration between the time when an alarm was generated and the onset of farrowing, similar to Traulsen et al [17] and on the basis of the associated distribution of alarms.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Near-continuous observation of preparturient mares is extremely labour-intensive, and time requirements would be markedly reduced with automated monitoring systems. In cattle, automated monitoring and alert systems are used for oestrous detection (Chanvallon et al, 2014;Pennington, Albright, & Callahan, 1986;Roelofs, van Eerdenburg, Soede, & Kemp, 2005) and health management (Borchers, Chang, Tsai, Wadsworth, & Bewley, 2016;Müller & Schrader, 2003) and are also increasingly advocated for monitoring of cows before calving (Krieger et al, 2017;Marchesi et al, 2013;Ouellet et al, 2016). Monitoring devices in cattle are often made for long-term recordings and are fixed permanently on the animal whereas for birth alert, pedometers (Nishimura et al, 2017;Titler et al, 2015) or intravaginal sensors (Palombi et al, 2013) are used.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%