Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The aim of study was to analyze aerobic capacity and anaerobic power levels of the university students. Total forty university students who is department physical education and department business (age means; 21.15±1.46 years for male and age means; 20.55±1.79 years for female in department physical education), volunteered to participate in this study. Anaerobic power was measured with Running Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST). Oxygen consumption was estimated 20-m shuttle run test. We found that was aerobic and minimum anaerobic capacity of physical education students higher than aerobic and minimum anaerobic capacity of business students (P&lt;0.05). On the other hand, we didn’t found differences between physical education female and male students and business female and male students in maximal anaerobic capacity and average anaerobic capacity (P&gt;0.05). We found that was aerobic and minimum anaerobic capacity of female and male students in department physical education higher than aerobic and minimum anaerobic capacity of female and male students in department of business (P&lt;0.05). In addition, fatigue index of female students in department physical education lower than fatigue index of female students in department of business was found (P&lt;0.05). In conclusion, recreational sportive activities affect development of aerobic capacity, depending on this, aerobic capacities of the students having education at the physical education and sport teaching department are more advanced than the students of the business management department due to applied courses included in the curriculum, in addition to recreational activities, genetic factors are determinants of anaerobic capacities.</p>
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".