Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dear friends, We are entering into the fourth year of publishing Science of Gymnastics Journal. Year 2011 was successful as we published 16 articles. Articles were written by authors from Brazilia, Portugal, Serbia, Greece, Unitade States of America, Australia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Germany, Austria, United Kingdom, Belgium and Slovenia, all together from 13 countries. We were entered into the ProQuest data base, we are still testing SchoolarOne Manuscript Software, and we have a new editorial board member – Koichi Endo from Japan. From last October issue we have to apologize to the authors Luísa Amaral, José Ferreirinha, Paulo Santos and Albrecht Claessens as we did some errors in article design; you can find corrected article on our web pages. The February issue we start with the article from sport management. Mauricio Santos Oliveira and Marco Antonio Bortoleto analyzed impact of Brazilian State support to results of gymnasts. For gymnastics developing countries the experience of Brazilians can be of a high value as they have excellent gymnasts. It is worth to note between 5th and 6th October 2012 in Rio Claro (Sao Paulo State University, Brasilia) will be organized 3rd International Seminar on Artistic and Rhythmic Competitive Gymnastics. In 2010 the seminar was of a high quality with many international experts including Keith Russell, FIG Scientific Commission president. econd article is from Lurdes Ávila-Carvalho (Portugal), Panagiota Klentrou (Canada), Maria da Luz Palomero (Spain) and Eunice Lebre (Portugal) and analysis morphologic characteristics of rhytmic gymnast’s. International team detected changes in the past few years towards more healty body posture of womens involved in rhytmics. The third article comes from Greece. Authors Olivia Donti, Kalliopi Theodorakou, Spiros Kambiotis and Anstasia Donti prepared article with title Self-esteem and Trait Anxiety in Girls Practicing Competitive and Recreational Gymnastics Sports, and found important facts for artistic gymnastics coaches to deal with anxiety. The fourth article is from Croatia, Kamenka Živčić Marković, Ines Čavar and Goran Sporiš were monitoring 5-6 years old girls - gymnasts for nine months how they developed under their gymnastics program. It is worth to look at the figures with development curves as they are non linear and make us to think more about the development pathways. The fifth article deals with rhythmic gymnastics and motor learning. Greek authors Despoina Τsopani, George Dallas, N. Tasika, A. Tinto write how is more effective learning of rhythmic gymnastics for novice adult physical education students. Worth to read and re-think about our rhythmic and gymnastics programs at Universities. The sixth and the seventh article are dealing with Code of Points. German authors Thomas Heinen, Pia M. Vinken and Konstantinos Velentzas were exploring how laypeople and expert judges evaluate gymnasts’ performance. It seems they can both well evaluate the gymnasts’ performance. Perhaps the Code of Points is not too complex? Slovenian - Canadian authors Ivan Čuk, Hardy Fink and Bojan Leskošek analyzed the impact of different ways of calculating final score (difficulty and execution) on ranking. With more weight on execution, ranking would be very changed; different gymnasts would enter into finals, but Code of Points most important statement - the gymnast must include in his exercise only elements that he can perform with complete safety and with a high degree of aesthetic and technical mastery would became effective. I wish you pleasant reading and a lot of inspiration. Ivan Čuk, Editor-in-Chief
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,037 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,145 | 0,092 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».