Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fitness performance of southern British Columbia Indian children as measured by the Canadian Association for Health Physical Education and Recreation Fitness-Performance Test was studied to determine the following. 1. Were there any significant differences between the fitness performance of the Indian children tested and the fitness performance of other Canadian children? 2. Were there any significant differences between the fitness performance of the Indian children who attended provincial schools and those who attended Indian schools? 3. Were there any significant differences between the fitness performance of the Indian children who lived in residence and those who lived at home? The CAHPER Fitness-Performance Test was administered to 651 Indian children between the ages of eight to seventeen years. The subjects were students of selected Indian schools or were living in Indian residential schools selected for this study. The significant differences found which showed the Indian children to have better performances were concentrated in three test items: the flexed arm hang, the shuttle run, and the fifty yard run. The CAHPER mean scores which were found to be significantly better were concentrated in two test items: the standing broad jump and the one minute speed sit-up tests. In the comparison of the fitness performance of Indian children attending provincial schools with the Indian school students, all of the significant differences found indicated a superior performance by provincial school students. Only one significant difference was found which favoured the Indian children who lived at home. Significantly better scores for Indian children who live in residence were found on all test items.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".