Self-Assessed Tactical Skills in Elite Youth Soccer Players: A Longitudinal Study
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
Self-assessed tactical skills were investigated among 191 youth soccer players from ages 14 through 18 playing in different field positions. On a yearly basis, all players completed the Tactical Skills Inventory for Sports with scales for attacking and defensive situations and for declarative and procedural knowledge. A model to assess whether tactical skills change over time in each field position was developed using multilevel analysis. The models indicated that defenders and midfielders did not improve their tactical skills, whereas attackers increased their tactical skills from ages 14 to 18 years. The representing part of tactical skills for defenders is Acting in Changing Situations, for midfielders Positioning and Deciding, whereas Knowing About Ball Actions was the qualifying factor for attackers. Possible explanations for these differences in tactical skills among elite youth soccer players are the selection procedures at a younger age and task-specific experiences.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it