MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980329769 · doi:10.1002/jaba.653

Application of the matching law to Mixed Martial Arts

2019· article· en· W2980329769 on OpenAlexaff
Holly A. Seniuk, Janie P. Vu, Melissa R. Nosik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of FrederictonUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMartial artsMatching (statistics)PsychologySelection (genetic algorithm)Shot (pellet)ChampionshipFunction (biology)AdversarySocial psychologyApplied psychologyLawCognitive psychologyStatisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceVisual artsPolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the contemporary behavior-analytic literature, athletic performance (e.g.,choice of shot or movement) across multiple team sports has been found to correspond with predictions of the generalized matching equation. However, the research in this area has focused primarily on team sports. In the current study the Generalized Matching Equation (GME) was applied to Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) performance by examining strike selection as a function of landing significant strikes among fighters from various weight classes in the Ultimate Fighting Championship. The results suggest that the GME is a good descriptor of strike selection in MMA, an individual sport that is dynamic and fast paced where responding results in immediate feedback from an opponent.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Behavior AnalysisSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207