Impacto do tamanho corporal, da idade relativa e do índice de desenvolvimento humano sobre a participação de futebolistas brasileiros na Liga dos Campeões da UEFA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated the effects of body size, relative age (RA), and human development index (HDI) on theprofessional rise of Brazilian soccer players playing in Europe. The sample consisted of 309 Brazilian players in the top 10 Europeanleagues, according to the ranking of UEFA club coefficients. The data were collected on the official websites of the clubs, and professionaladvancement was classified according to the level of participation in the European championships. Spearman’s Correlation and MultinomialLogistic Regression tests (p d» 0.05) were applied. Players born in the 2nd quarter of the year, as well as those born in the 3rd quarter,have the chance to play the Champions League, compared to the Europa League, increased by 84% and 67%, respectively, compared tothose born in the 4th quarter (p = 0.01). In addition, it was identified that for every 1 cm of height, the chances of the player acting in alower level team increased by 7% (p = 0.03). It is concluded that the RA and body size influence the professional rise of Brazilian soccerplayers working in Europe, while the HDI of the place of birth has limited impact on the level of competition disputed by these players.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".