Kinematics of the Ankle Joint Complex in Snowboarding
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
Because snowboarders are known to injure their ankles more often than Alpine skiers, it has been postulated that stiffer snowboard boots would provide better protection to the ankle than current soft boots do. Snowboarders are also known to injure their front ankle more often than their back ankle, presumably because of the asymmetrical rotations of the ankles due to asymmetrical binding adjustement. To test these hypotheses, we measured the kinematics of the feet and legs of 5 snowboarders wearing soft boots and stiffer step-in boots during snowboarding maneuvers using an electromagnetic motion tracking system. The results were expressed in anatomically relevant rotations of the ankle joint complex, namely dorsi-/plantar flexion, eversion/inversion, and internal/external rotation. The measured ankle rotations show differences in the movement patterns of the front and back legs. Step-in boots were shown to allow less dorsiflexion, eversion, and external rotation than softer boots, possibly explaining why they are associated with a lower rate of fractures of the talus than soft boots.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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