Long spaced seeds for finding similarities between biological sequences.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of insoles and additional shock absorption foam on the cushioning properties of various sport shoes with an impact testing method. Three commercial sport shoes were used in this study, and shock absorption foam (TPE5020; Vers Tech Science Co. Ltd., Taiwan) with 2-mm thickness was placed below the insole in the heel region for each shoe. Eight total impacts with potential energy ranged from 1.82 to 6.08 J were performed onto the heel region of the shoe. The order of testing conditions was first without insole, then with insole, and finally interposing the shock absorption foam for each shoe. Peak deceleration of the striker was measured with an accelerometer attached to the striker during impact. The results of this study seemed to show that the insole or additional shock absorption foam could perform its shock absorption effect well for the shoes with limited midsole cushioning. Further, our findings showed that insoles absorbed more, even up to 24-32% of impact energy under low impact energy. It seemed to indicate that insoles play a more important role in cushioning properties of sport shoes under a low impact energy condition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it