MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171318216 · doi:10.1123/ijspp.3.1.80

An Investigation of the Type and Frequency of Movement Patterns of National Hockey League Goaltenders

2008· article· en· W2171318216 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon J. Bell, Gary Snydmiller, Alex Game

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueMovement (music)PsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDemographyMedicinePhysicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twenty-four National Hockey League (NHL) goaltenders were observed to determine the types and frequency of their movements during actual games. A secondary purpose was to compare these movements across the 3 periods of game play and between 2 NHL seasons (2003-04 and 2005-06) as a result of several rule changes between seasons. The mean (+/- SD) age, height, body mass, and years of NHL experience of the goaltenders were 30 +/- 4 y, 85.4 +/- 4.4 kg, 184.0 +/- 3.8 cm, 6.6 +/- 4.0 y, respectively. The mean (+/- SD) number of times and type of movements used during a game in order of most frequent were vertical movement (43.7 +/- 10.3), moving laterally (39.7 +/- 12.7), moving into full-butterfly position (32.1), anterior-posterior movement in front of goal crease (31.5 +/- 11.5), skating out of the goal area to play the puck (19.7 +/- 6.3), and using a half butterfly on a single leg pad (left = 5.2 +/- 1.9, right = 6.4 +/- 2.1). Goaltenders played the puck less frequently during the final period of the game than during the first 2 periods and more frequently between the 2 different NHL seasons after certain rule changes. It was concluded that NHL goaltenders move most frequently vertically, laterally, and out of the net to play the puck. In addition, goaltenders moved out of the goal area to play the puck less often in the third period but more frequently after several league rule changes designed to reduce this movement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Physiology and PerformanceSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207