MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2379054048

Modern Gymnastics Trend from the View of 2001 International Gymnastics Evaluation Rules

2001· article· en· W2379054048 on OpenAlexaff
Hong Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chengdu Physical Education Institute · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhysical Education and Gymnastics
Canadian institutionsPrairie Improvement Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion (physics)CreativityMovement (music)Computer scienceSubject (documents)Artificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionAestheticsPolitical scienceLawWorld Wide WebArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rules”is the basis of evaluation and the mark of the subject development. The biggest breaking-through of the latest rule is the data evaluation from the combination of 3 aspects. Secondly,players can choose whatever adjusts to their own capabilities. To fulfill the body motion connected quantity of some instrument movement and its operation way has become the more advanced creativity in the gymnastics of 21st century.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chengdu Physical Education InstituteSame topicPhysical Education and GymnasticsFrench-language works237,207