MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520976699 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2016-0466

Pivot–slide model of the motion of a curling rock

2016· article· en· W2520976699 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mark R. A. Shegelski, Edward P. Lozowski

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWinter Sports Injuries and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurlingCurl (programming language)PhysicsMechanicsAnnulus (botany)Classical mechanicsGeometryMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the framework of a new mathematical model to account for the curl of a curling rock. The model is based upon two physical processes: a brief pivot of the rock around a point directly beneath the contact annulus, followed by a longer slide. The model predictions agree with observed curl distances on pebbled ice. The model also gives a weak dependence of the curl distance on the rate of rotation of the rock, in agreement with observations. We suggest possible physical mechanisms to initiate these two processes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations31
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicWinter Sports Injuries and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207