
ABSTRACTThis study evaluates the effectiveness of XGBoost and LightGBM algorithms for estimating the live weight of Holstein×Zebu crossbred heifers. The study compares the performance of both algorithms using a wide range of biometric measurements and tests various hyperparameter settings. The research results show that the XGBoost algorithm provides almost perfect agreement with an R2 value of 0.999 on the training set and high performance with an R2 value of 0.986 on the test set. The LightGBM algorithm also achieved effective results with R2 values of 0.986 and 0.981 on both training and test sets. The machine learning algorithms used in the current study stand out as having the potential to provide a practical and economical solution for live weight estimation in livestock enterprises and especially for herd management applications in rural areas through input variables such as body measurements, milk yield, etc. However, the obtained results in the current study reveal the potential of machine learning algorithms for live weight estimation in the livestock sector and indicate that advanced research is needed for the optimisation of these algorithms.
Veterinary medicine, Body Weight, LightGBM, Machine Learning, Boosting Machine Learning Algorithms, machine learning, SF600-1100, body weight prediction, Animals, Original Article, Female, Animal Husbandry, Algorithms, crossbred heifer, XGBoost
Veterinary medicine, Body Weight, LightGBM, Machine Learning, Boosting Machine Learning Algorithms, machine learning, SF600-1100, body weight prediction, Animals, Original Article, Female, Animal Husbandry, Algorithms, crossbred heifer, XGBoost
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
