Analyzing championship squash match-play: In search of a system description
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider championship squash match-play as an open system in which order spontaneously arises through self-organization as a result of information that is directly available in the environment. Perturbing an open system from its current state temporarily destabilizes the system, from which the system either returns to its former state or settles into a new state in accord with the newly imposed conditions. If perturbations exist in championship squash match-play, then they are likely a result of a shot that places one player at a disadvantage to the other and these shot perturbations should be prone to detection by independent observers. We report data from a behavioural observation study of championship squash match-play that shows that (a) the system can be reliably identified as being in either a stable or unstable state by expert observers (к≥80) and, to a lesser extent, also by non-expert observers (к<.80), and (b) the shot perturbations responsible for the transition to instability are easily evidenced. We consider future possibilities for sport analysis research in the context of open systems in our undertaking to describe and explain athletic behaviour.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".