Percepcao da melhoria do conhecimento tatico dos jogadores de futebol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ferramentas visuais tem sido utilizadas para auxiliar treinadores no ensino, na organizacao e no treino da tatica nas equipes de esportes coletivos. Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar a percepcao da melhoria da aprendizagem tatica dos jogadores de um equipe de futebol Sub-14 do Canada. Um procedimento experimental, com avaliacao pre e pos teste, foi utilizado para comparar 129 auto-avaliacoes realizadas por 14 jogadores e 116 avaliacoes do treinador da equipe estudada. Foi utilizado o teste Wilcoxon (z) para comparacoes de pares com SPSS. Conclui-se que ensinar e organizar uma equipe com apoio visual melhorou o conhecimento tatico dos jogadores e contribuiu a uma percepcao positiva do desempenho. Ferramentas visuais mostram capacidades de complementar os exercicios no campo, apoiar a transferencia do conhecimento tatico declarativo dos jogadores ate o processual, e consequentemente beneficiar o desempenho coletivo.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".