## 3 Results
### Measurement Results of Observer #2 and the Automated Program  
Observer #2 and the automated program for analyzing depth images measured 529.67 s and 543.78 s for total sitting time, respectively. There was no significant difference between the 2 measurements (Table 3, N = 9, t = \(-\)1.324, \(p\) = 0.222). Observer #2 and the automated program for analyzing depth images measured 62.00 s and 55.67 s for total standing time, respectively. (Table 3, N = 9, t = 1.115, \(p\) = 0.297). Observer #2 and the automated program for analyzing depth images measured 308.33 s and 304.78 s for total pacing time, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two measurements (Table 3, N = 9, t = 0.340, \(p\) = 0.743). As shown above, there was no statistical difference between the values of observer #2 and the program measurement in the action time of the monkeys' behavioral patterns, including sitting, standing, or pacing. The two measurements were statistically identical (\(p\) > 0.05).  
The measurement results of two observers and the automated program for analyzing depth images were revealed to be statistically identical (Table 4, Figure 7).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Subject \#** & **R1** & **R2** & **R3** & **R4** & **R5** & **R6** & **R7** & **R8** & **R9** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Sitting**} & Program & 690 & 102 & 536 & 54 & 751 & 456 & 891 & 719 & 717 \\  & Observer \#1 & 691 & 88 & 531 & 38 & 766 & 414 & 887 & 732 & 671 \\  & Observer \#2 & 667 & 46 & 528 & 14 & 801 & 408 & 889 & 734 & 669 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Standing**} & Program & 148 & 19 & 38 & 68 & 42 & 32 & 0 & 117 & 37 \\  & Observer \#1 & 138 & 23 & 41 & 108 & 40 & 66 & 6 & 115 & 74 \\  & Observer \#2 & 164 & 14 & 34 & 57 & 36 & 62 & 5 & 115 & 72 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Pacing**} & Program & 54 & 780 & 326 & 779 & 116 & 432 & 9 & 64 & 184 \\  & Observer \#1 & 71 & 789 & 321 & 752 & 95 & 419 & 7 & 53 & 155 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Observer \#2 & 69 & 844 & 339 & 826 & 61 & 412 & 8 & 52 & 159 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Comparison of raw data between measurement analysis from the automated program and two observers for each subject.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Observer \#1** & **Program** & **t** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Mean \(\pm\) SE** & **Mean \(\pm\) SE** & & \\ \hline Sitting & 535.89 \(\pm\) 99.92 & 543.78 \(\pm\) 98.19 & \(-\)1.268 & 0.240 \\ \hline Standing & 68.00 \(\pm\) 14.94 & 55.67 \(\pm\) 15.93 & 1.933 & 0.089 \\ \hline Pacing & 296.00 \(\pm\) 100.10 & 304.78 \(\pm\) 100.38 & \(-\)1.963 & 0.085 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{c} Mean \(\pm\) SE: mean \(\pm\) standard error. t: paired \(t\)-test. \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Comparison of the measurement analysis between the automated program and the observer #1.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Action**} & **Observer \#2** & **Program** & **t/z** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Mean \(\pm\) SE** & **Mean \(\pm\) SE** & \\ \hline Sitting & 529.67 \(\pm\) 103.99 & 543.78 \(\pm\) 98.19 & \(-\)1.324 & 0.222 \\ \hline Standing & 62.00 \(\pm\) 16.76 & 55.67 \(\pm\) 15.94 & 1.115 & 0.297 \\ \hline Pacing \({}^{\dagger}\) & 308.33 \(\pm\) 108.80 & 304.78 \(\pm\) 100.38 & 0.340 & 0.743 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{c} Mean \(\pm\) SE: mean \(\pm\) standard error. t: paired \(t\)-test. \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Comparison of the measurement analysis between the automated program and the observer #2.