Changes in locomotive rates during senior elite rugby league matches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to quantify the changes in locomotive rates across the duration of senior elite rugby league matches. A semi-automated image recognition system (ProZone 3, ProZone®, Leeds, England) was used to track the movements of 59 players from six teams during three competitive matches. The players were classified into one of four positional groups: props (n = 9), back row (n = 9), pivots (n = 14) or outside backs (n = 27). Players' movements were classified as low, high or very high intensity running and reported as locomotive rates (distance covered per minute played) for successive quarters of each match. Analysis of variance revealed that only the outside backs showed a significantly lower overall locomotive rate during the final quarter compared to the first (P < 0.05). However, locomotive rates for high and very high intensity running during the final quarter were significantly lower (P < 0.05) than the first quarter among outside backs, pivots and props despite no change in the rate of involvements in contact. On the basis of these findings, it is suggested that high and very high intensity running locomotive rates may be more affective methods of detecting fatigue during competitive matches than overall locomotive rate.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".