The Relative Age Effect in Poland's Elite Youth Soccer Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The relative age effect (RAE) is related to discrimination against youth athletes born in the last quarter of the calendar year. The current study presents research on the RAE in elite youth soccer players in Poland. Players in the Central Junior League (CLJ) finals represent 0.59% of the 25,756 players under 20 years old (U20). This study analyzed the post-game protocols of the CLJ knockout stage from the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons as well as the U17-U21 teams during 2015, including only players who played on the field for at least one minute (n = 395). The results revealed the existence of RAE in the examined groups ( CLJ 2013/2014, χ23 = 15.441, p < 0.01, CLJ 2014/2015, χ23 = 20.891, p < 0.001 U17-U21, χ23 = 25.110, p < 0.001). In addition, the results differed by monthly birth distribution in the Polish population (PP) between 1995 and 1999. This study is the first to examine the RAE in youth soccer in Poland. The occurrence of the RAE with regard to the most promising youth and national team players suggests that a similar effect exists among younger age categories. To reduce the RAE related to identifying soccer talent, tools should be implemented to optimize the player-selection process, such as those that consider the biological development of a player.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".