Regulation of Balance After Spinning: A Comparison Between Figure Skaters and Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of the present study was to compare the balance performance of control subjects and varsity figure skaters after spinning on a turntable for 6 seconds. It was hypothesized figure skaters would demonstrate better balance control after spinning. Methods: 9 female figure skaters and 9 female control subjects stood as still as possible for 15 seconds on a Kistler force plate during both a control condition and after spinning for 6 seconds on a turntable. Balance performance was quantified by the percentage of total time the center of pressure (CoP) was within a 5mm radius of the center of their base of support (BoS). Results: In the control condition, figure skaters and control participants did not have significantly different balance ability. In the post-spin condition, figure skaters were significantly better at maintaining their CoP within a smaller area. Conclusions: These results are valuable from a training and coaching perspective because they suggest that balance performance after spinning can be improved with training.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".