Tracking In-Match Movement Demands Using Local Positioning System in World-Class Men's Ice Hockey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Douglas, AS and Kennedy, CR. Tracking in-match movement demands using local positioning system in world-class men's ice hockey. J Strength Cond Res 34(3): 639-646, 2020-While the global positioning system has been used in field sports for a decade, local positioning systems are newly available in indoor sports for the tracking of velocity and distance during competition. World-class male ice hockey players (n = 20) were monitored during 5 international matches. Speed and distance outputs were analyzed to determine the differences between positions, periods, and in-shift demands. Defense had a difference between forwards at distances covered at very slow (p < 0.001), slow (p < 0.001), and moderate (p < 0.001) speed. Forwards were found to cover a greater distance at very fast speed (p = 0.001) and sprint speed (p < 0.001). Defense had a decrease in skating distance at very fast (p < 0.001) and sprint skating speeds (p = 0.02). Forwards had an increase in very slow skating (p = 0.02) and a decrease in sprint skating distance (p = 0.02). Game situational differences were found for defense and forwards in average speeds for defense (p < 0.001) and forwards (p < 0.001). Local positioning systems data have the potential to accurately inform coaches of the position-specific demands of game situations and the training needs by position. Specifically, forwards performed more high-intensity skating than defensemen, whereas powerplay and penalty kill situations offered specific demands for the 2 positional groups. Finally, the intensity of skating was reduced in the third period for both defensemen and forwards. Further research can evaluate whether this is related to tactical decisions, or the metabolic cost of ice hockey.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".