3 ms·
If it is such a gestalt, not explainable function. I am almost certain it isn't just visual. It would be interesting to see the level of accuracy with just vide
by daveguy 9y ago
If it is such a gestalt, not explainable function. I am almost certain it isn't just visual. It would be interesting to see the level of accuracy with just video of the vent exposure. Even more so, just an image.
The article states the sexers accidentally kill some chicks at first when learning because of the force required to expose the vents. The force required could provide some clue. The way the vent moves under some manipulations could make a difference.
I would rather the whole thing be solved with ultrasonic or some other imaging well before hatching.
- rkagerer 9y agoIndeed. If they were able to maintain accuracy using images, that sounds like it would be a perfect candidate for experimenting with machine learning (using the tagged images).
- bayesian_horse 9y agoIf it were so easy as to use ultrasound, people would do that already. The resolution of ultrasound, even at that little distance, is pretty bad. I doubt if the reproductive organs are big enough at that age. If I remember correctly, they don't differ that much at this stage either.