Quiet eye predicts goaltender success in deflected ice hockey shots<sup>†</sup>
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
In interceptive timing tasks, long quiet eye (QE) durations at the release point, along with early tracking on the object, allow performers to couple their actions to the kinematics of their opponent and regulate their movements based on emergent information from the object's trajectory. We used a mobile eye tracker to record the QE of eight university-level ice hockey goaltenders of an equivalent skill level as they responded to shots that deflected off a board placed to their left or right, resulting in a trajectory with low predictability. QE behaviour was assessed using logistic regression and magnitude-based inference. We found that when QE onset occurred later in the shot (950 ± 580 ms, mean ± SD) there was an increase in the proportion of goals allowed (41% vs. 22%) compared to when QE onset occurred earlier. A shorter QE duration (1260 ± 630 ms) predicted a large increase in the proportion of goals scored (38% vs. 14%). More saves occurred when QE duration (2074 ± 47 ms) was longer. An earlier QE offset (2004 ± 66 ms) also resulted in a large increase in the number of goals allowed (37% vs. 11%) compared to a later offset (2132 ± 41 ms). Since an early, sustained QE duration contributed to a higher percentage of saves, it is important that coaches develop practice activities that challenge the goaltender's ability to fixate the puck early, as well as sustain a long QE fixation on the puck until after it is released from the stick.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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