Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to investigate fitness characteristics of college women and men (n = 427 and 423, respectively) aged 17-20 years whose values were compared to the data of the 1981 Canada Fitness Survey (CFS). Muscular fitness as revealed by the maximal number of arm extensions (push ups) was lower in subjects of this study compared to those tested in the 1981 CFS. On the other hand, body weight, waist circumference and the sum of five skinfolds were greater in subjects of the present study. These differences between the results of this study and those of the 1981 CFS were particularly pronounced in the upper percentile ranks. The classification of subjects on the basis of the number of grades completed during a step test revealed significant differences in subcutaneous adiposity between fitness subgroups. Reported participation in vigorous physical activities was also predictive of subcutaneous adiposity in men but to a lesser extent than the number of grades completed during a step test. When the number of grades and exercise participation were combined to detect between-group morphological differences, large differences in subcutaneous adiposity were observed in both men and women. This suggests that the effect of vigorous activity and aerobic fitness on adiposity may be much greater than what is generally perceived by health professionals and agencies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".