Game location and aggression in rugby league
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examined the relationship between aggression and game location in rugby league. We videotaped a random sample of 21 professional rugby league games played in the 2000 Super League season. Trained observers recorded the frequency of aggressive behaviours. Consistent with previous research, which used territoriality theories as a basis for prediction, we hypothesized that the home team would behave more aggressively than the away team. The results showed no significant difference in the frequency of aggressive behaviours exhibited by the home and away teams. However, the away teams engaged in substantially more aggressive behaviours in games they lost compared with games they won. No significant differences in the pattern of aggressive behaviours for home and away teams emerged as a function of game time (i.e. first or second half) or game situation (i.e. when teams were winning, losing or drawing). The findings suggest that while home and away teams do not display different levels of aggression, the cost of behaving aggressively (in terms of game outcome) may be greater for the away team.
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.
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 it