MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967704768 · doi:10.1155/2014/685468

Comparison of Three Measures to Promote National Fitness in China by Mathematical Modeling

2014· article· en· W1967704768 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pan Tang, Daqing Xu, Qing Dai, Tingting Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstract and Applied Analysis · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysical Activity and Education Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsChinaMeasure (data warehouse)Mathematical statisticsMathematicsGovernment (linguistics)Key (lock)Order (exchange)Physical fitnessEconometricsStatisticsComputer sciencePolitical scienceMedicinePhysical therapyEconomicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we established a mathematical model for national fitness in China. Based on a questionnaire and data of the General Administration of Sport of China and the National Bureau of Statistics of China, the dynamics for three classes of people are expressed by a system of three-dimensional ordinary equations. Model parameters are estimated from the data. This study indicated that national fitness put out by the Chinese government is reasonable. By finding the key parameter, the best measure to promote national fitness is put forward. In order to increase the number of people who frequently participate in sport exercise in a short period of time, if only one measure can be chosen, guiding people who never take part in physical exercise will be the best measure.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAbstract and Applied AnalysisSame topicPhysical Activity and Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207