MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2198319038

ISBS: THE EVOLUTION OF A REVOLUTION

2008· article· en· W2198319038 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Ostarello

Bibliographic record

VenueISBS - Conference Proceedings Archive · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSports biomechanicsCommonwealthBiomechanicsEngineeringPolitical scienceLawMedicineSimulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PROLOGUE: The idea of an organization dedicated to the advancement of sports biomechanics germinated during the Montreal Olympic Games in 1976, where the Olympic Biomechanics Cinematography research team, led by Professor Juris Terauds, discussed the issue at length. At the University of Alberta in the fall of 1977 Terauds continued to explore the idea through a long series of philosophical conversations with Geoff Dyson. These discussions explored a variety of topics, including the value of biomechanics in sports, the nature of biomechanics research, and ways in which coaches could be brought “out of the dark ages” and into the starting blocks with scientifically based information. An informal meeting was held in conjunction with the Clinic for High Speed Biomechanics Cinematography in Edmonton, Canada during the International Congress of Sports Sciences in July 1978. Participants expressed a strong sentiment supporting an international society of sports biomechanics. It was not, however, until the following month, at the Commonwealth Games, that the 29 members of the biomechanics cinematography research team addressed the problems of forming and implementing an international society focusing on sports biomechanics. Juris Terauds obtained a two-year sabbatical leave from the University of Alberta for the period 1979 to 1981. He used this time to promote the idea of an international society with biomechanics enthusiasts from around the world. This was no trivial task in an era when the dominant technologies were typewriters, snail mail and non-cell telephones. Nonetheless, he was able to consult with a substantial group of sports scientists. It is interesting that in spite of the relative difficulty of communication, 17 of 40 contributors he contacted were not residents of the U.S.A. Those who made significant contributions are listed in Appendix A.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISBS - Conference Proceedings ArchiveSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207