International comparison of life conditions for female wheelchair basketball athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was conducted to clarify the actual conditions of daily life and sport activity for female wheelchair basketball athletes with physical disability, and to analyze the similarities and differences between Japan and other countries. A survey was conducted during the International Wheelchair Basketball Friendship Games Osaka Cup, which was held on February 19-21, 2009, and attended by Japan, Australia, Canada and the USA. A questionnaire based on the previous studies of Warkings (2004) and Woodson (2008) was distributed to a total of 43 athletes, and the main results were as follows: Similarities: 1) Motivation or will to win was very strong among athletes who were facing fierce competition. 2) For this reason, the athletes hoped for the more professional support to help them improve and develop their skills and techniques for wheelchair basketball. 3) The athletes expressed concern about the expenditure, as well as the time required, for training and competition, and therefore hoped for some form of financial assistance. 4) The athletes hoped for more facilities that were gender-friendly, as well as barrier-free. 5) The athletes were aware of a feeling of unity or bonding with team-mates through their practice, as well as in games. There was a common feeling that among athletes, there is no distinction as to whether or not people have physical disability, or the country they are living in. Differences: 1) Japanese athletes wanted more information via various media, whereas athletes from other countries wanted extensive access to the Internet. 2) Japanese athletes expressed a wish for better job opportunities or work conditions, whereas foreign athletes hoped to raise public awareness of the need for financial support. 3) Japanese athletes considered that more media exposure would increase public understanding about the disabled, whereas athletes from other countries hoped for improvements in public education about disability.
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 | 0.001 | 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".