Professionalism, Golf Coaching and a Master of Science Degree:
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While it is probably true that it is easier to comprehend the cause-and-effect dynamics of impact, I would argue that the dynamics of the rest of the golf swing (e.g., the downswing) should not be regarded as a matter of opinion. The same set of dynamical laws that allow the prediction of ball flight following the ~0.00045 s of impact time with the club head, can be used to explain how the club head is able to arrive at impact with a specific set of kinematics based on the forces the golfer applies to the club over the ~0.25 s of downswing time. Perhaps Foley was simply trying to highlight the challenges with developing a deterministiclike model for the downswing. However, if one of the most renowned golf instructors in the world believes that our scientific understanding of impact is far beyond that of the downswing, then a Master of Science degree in golf teaching/coaching has an important role to play in the development of professionalism in the discipline.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".