ВОЗРАСТ И ТЕЛОСЛОЖЕНИЕ ЛЫЖНИЦ-ГОНЩИЦ ВЫСОКОГО КЛАССА
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present research was to analyze age and constitution indices in female racing skiers who took places 1-10 in individual competitions in cross-country skiing in different distances in winter Olympic games in Vancouver (2010). Research methods: analysis and generalization of literature sources, summarizing and mathematical analysis of documents of International ski federation (FIS), score sheets on cross-country skiing in winter Olympics in Vancouver, analysis of biographic data of female racing skiers. The optimum age limits to achieve best results in crosscountry skiing on different distances for women are from 26,3 3,1 to 29,0 2 years. Age and constitution indices in female racing skiers, who had taken the 1-3rd and 4-10th places on various distances in winter Olympics in Vancouver, slightly differed but female skiers leading in sprint were higher and than female skiers who had taken same places on other distances. The age and constitution indices of female racing skiers - winners and prize-winners and female skiers, who have taken 4-10 places in winter Olympics in Vancouver, can be used to determine model characteristics of elite female racing skiers on the modern stage of development of cross-country skiing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.011 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".