Circles with a suspended aid: reducing pommel reaction forces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of a suspended aid on the reaction forces during a basic skill on pommel horse. Twenty gymnasts performed three sets of 10 circles with and without a suspended aid on a pommel horse under which two force plates were set. The results confirmed that the suspended aid could reduce the magnitude of the pommel reaction forces during circles while maintaining the general loading pattern. On the left hand, the average and peak forces were attenuated to 0.59 body weight (BW) and 0.85 BW from 0.76 BW and 1.13 BW, respectively. The right hand experienced slightly larger forces with no-aid trials, but the asymmetry between the hands decreased with the aid. Despite a relatively large variability, all gymnasts experienced smaller impact peak forces with the aid. A suspended aid is most commonly used for a beginner gymnast as an introduction to pommel horse exercises. However, this study confirmed that it can also be useful for all levels of gymnasts who would like to practice pommel horse exercises with reduced pommel reaction forces for a purpose such as a progression for learning a new skill, control of training volume, or rehabilitation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".