
The PigDetect dataset was designed to support the benchmarking of pig detection algorithms from images as introduced in the "A Large-Scale Longitudinal Dataset for Pig Tracking and Re-Identification" article. To ensure both diversity and representation, two data allocation strategies were applied. The first followed the standard practice by randomly sampling frames across the dataset. The second method targeted high-density scenarios by ranking frames according to the mean Intersection over Union (IoU) of all objects within each frame, and removing subsequent neighbouring frames (N = 5) to avoid over‑representation of similar viewpoints. From the selected pool of images, the top 200 frames were retained for subsequent random sampling. For both allocation strategies, the same imaging days were used to define the training/validation/test splits. Fourteen imaging days (representing different groups, ages, and pen sizes) were assigned to the test subset (N = 280 frames), while the remaining 202 days formed the training and validation pool (N = 4,040 frames). For each imaging day and group, 20 frames were randomly selected from the curated subset. The final training/validation data was partitioned using a 90:10 split, while the testing subset was generated using separate held-out days, representing approx. 7% of the combined training and validation sets.
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer and information sciences, FOS: Agricultural sciences, Machine learning, Computer vision, Agricultural sciences
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer and information sciences, FOS: Agricultural sciences, Machine learning, Computer vision, Agricultural sciences
| 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). | 0 | |
| 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. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
