Research on the Boost of Development on Young Children’s Fine Motor by Folk Games
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
<p class="apa">As Chinese traditional folk culture, folk games have unique educational value which can boost the development of young children’s fine motor. Based on previous investigation of fine motor skill of children in Nanchong, Sichuan Province, the researcher chose a middle class in public city kindergarten A with lower survey score as the study object. The class with lower level on fine motor skill was set as an intervention group and the other class as a control group to conduct a 3-month educational activity about folk games. During the process, the researchers, being the teachers themselves, used qualitative research method to study the process of educational activities about folk games targeting at the boost of development on young children’s fine motor skills, by tracking and observing children, and physical analysis of their painting and handwork. The research results indicate that there is an overall improvement of fine motor skills of young children from the intervention group in kindergarten A and their performances on pinching, touching, drawing and cutting all surpass children from the control group.</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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 it