Identification of the contribution of contact and aerial biomechanical parameters in acrobatic performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Teaching acrobatic skills with a minimal amount of repetition is a major challenge for coaches. Biomechanical, statistical or computer simulation tools can help them identify the most determinant factors of performance. Release parameters, change in moment of inertia and segmental momentum transfers were identified in the prediction of acrobatics success. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the relative contribution of these parameters in performance throughout expertise or optimisation based improvements. The counter movement forward in flight (CMFIF) was chosen for its intrinsic dichotomy between the accessibility of its attempt and complexity of its mastery. METHODS: Three repetitions of the CMFIF performed by eight novice and eight advanced female gymnasts were recorded using a motion capture system. Optimal aerial techniques that maximise rotation potential at regrasp were also computed. A 14-segment-multibody-model defined through the Rigid Body Dynamics Library was used to compute recorded and optimal kinematics, and biomechanical parameters. A stepwise multiple linear regression was used to determine the relative contribution of these parameters in novice recorded, novice optimised, advanced recorded and advanced optimised trials. Finally, fixed effects of expertise and optimisation were tested through a mixed-effects analysis. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Variation in release state only contributed to performances in novice recorded trials. Moment of inertia contribution to performance increased from novice recorded, to novice optimised, advanced recorded, and advanced optimised trials. Contribution to performance of momentum transfer to the trunk during the flight prevailed in all recorded trials. Although optimisation decreased transfer contribution, momentum transfer to the arms appeared. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that novices should be coached on both contact and aerial technique. Inversely, mainly improved aerial technique helped advanced gymnasts increase their performance. For both, reduction of the moment of inertia should be focused on. The method proposed in this article could be generalized to any aerial skill learning investigation.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".