Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Dataset . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Dataset . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

PigDetect: A benchmark dataset for pig detection in images

Authors: Bernotas, Gytis; Hansen, Mark; Smith, Melvyn; Jack, Mhairi; Baxter, Emma; D'Eath, Rick;

PigDetect: A benchmark dataset for pig detection in images

Abstract

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.

Related Organizations
Keywords

FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer and information sciences, FOS: Agricultural sciences, Machine learning, Computer vision, Agricultural sciences

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    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
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
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).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
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.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average