MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807043936 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n6p118

The Research on Evaluation of College Students’ Ability to Achieve the Physical Exercising Habit and Volition

2018· article· en· W2807043936 on OpenAlex
Xiaodong Chu, Jun Liu

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Training Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolition (linguistics)HabitPsychologyAutomaticityPhysical educationMathematics educationSocial psychologyCognitionNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of modern society, the competition in all fields is becoming increasingly intensified. Therefore, people must be strong in volition if they want to stand out in such a competitive society. Especially for college students, they should form strong volition with the help of school education, or it will be difficult for them to make a career in the future. The research on college students’ ability to develop the physical exercising habit and volition is vital to the physical education of college students. This paper researches on the feasibility of developing college students’ ability to form volition by developing their physical exercising habit through school education, and analyses the influence factors of the formation of volition, hoping to give some theoretical references to the evaluation system of the ability to develop the physical exercising habit and volition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.306
GPT teacher head0.628
Teacher spread0.322 · 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