MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033497094 · doi:10.1080/02640410903503632

Space–time coordination dynamics in basketball: Part 1. Intra- and inter-couplings among player dyads

2010· article· en· W2033497094 on OpenAlexaff
Jérôme Bourbousson, Carole Sève, Tim McGarry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sports Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasketballPsychologyDynamics (music)Movement (music)Phase (matter)Space (punctuation)Competition (biology)Cognitive psychologyComputer scienceSocial psychologyCommunicationPhysicsGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined space-time patterns of basketball players during competition by analysing movement data obtained from six game sequences. Strong in-phase relations in the longitudinal (basket-to-basket) direction were observed for all playing dyads, especially player-opponent dyads matched for playing position, indicating that these movements were very constrained by the game demands. Similar findings for in-phase relations were observed for the most part in the lateral direction, the main exception being dyads comprising the two wing players from the same team. These dyads instead demonstrated strong attractions to anti-phase, a consequence perhaps of seeking to increase and decrease team width in tandem. Single instances from select dyads and game sequences demonstrated further evidence of phase stabilities and phase transitions on some occasions. Together, these findings demonstrate that space-time movement patterns of playing dyads in basketball, while unique, nonetheless conform to a uniform description in keeping with universal principles of dynamical self-organizing systems as hypothesized.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations170
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sports SciencesSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207