MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884796979 · doi:10.5539/jel.v7n5p174

The Effect of Somatotype Characteristics of Athletes on the Balance Performance

2018· article· en· W2884796979 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elif Top, Çağrı Çelenk, İrfan MARANGOZ, Zait Burak AKTUĞ, Taner Yılmaz, Mustafa Akıl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesBalance (ability)Elite athletesSignificant differencePsychologyCompetitive athletesPhysical therapyMathematicsMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our study aims to investigate the effects of somatotype characteristics of elite athletes on the balance performances. The study has included 46 elite athletes totally. The heights, body weights, skinfold thicknesses, periphery and diameter of skinfold of the subjects included in the study have been measured and somatotype characteristics have been determined by using Heath-Carter method. The balance performances of the athletes have been evaluated by using Biodex Balance System. It has been determined that the dynamic balance performance of the athletes has changed in accordance with the endomorph, mesomorph and ectomorph characteristics of the athletes; however, static balance performances have not changed. Accordingly, no difference has been observed between the oscillation indexes and static balances of the athletes (p>0.05), whereas a significant difference has been found as the balance level increases in accordance with the endomorph, mesomorph and ectomorph characteristics of the athletes in terms of dynamic balances (p<0.01, p<0.05, p<0.001). In conclusion, it is assumed that the athletes having endomorphic characteristics may be more successful in the sports branches that put an emphasis on the balance.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207