MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135860227

ANALISIS SHOOTING FREE THROW KAWHI LEONARD MVP (MOST VALUABLE PLAYER) FINAL NBA 2019 MENGGUNAKAN SOFTWARE KINOVEA

2020· article· en· W3135860227 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ervi Irwati, Himawan Wismanadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Kesehatan Olahraga · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSports and Physical Education Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laga Final NBA 2019 yang mempertemukan Tim Toronto raptors melawan Golden State Warriors Kawhi Leonard berhasil membawa timnya Toronto Raptors menjadi juara NBA 2019 sekaligus sebagai penerima penghargaan pemain terbaik. Di setiap poin yang diciptakan Kawhi Leonard memiliki tingkat keberhasilan paling tinggi pada percobaan shooting free throw. Tujuan : Untuk mengetahui efektivitas shooting Kawhi Leonard ditinjau dari aspek biomekanika yaitu sudut siku, sudut bahu, sudut elevasi dan kecepatan tembakan. Metode : Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian non-eksperimen dengan metode penelitian analisis deskriptif kuantitatif. Teknik analisis data menggunakan software Kinovea dan setelah data terkumpul akan dihitung dengan rumus persentase dan rumus gerak parabola. Hasil : tingkat keberhasilan shooting free throw Kawhi Leonard sebesar 88%, Sudut siku yang menghasilkan bola masuk yaitu pada rentang 86o-90o, sudut bahu 124o-130o, sudut elevasi 46o-52o dan rata-rata kecepatan tembakan 7,33 m/s. Kesimpulan : Shooting free throw yang paling efektif yaitu dengan sudut siku mendekati 90o, sudut bahu 129o, sudut elevasi 45o dengan kecepatan 7,69 m/s. Kata Kunci: Analisis biomekanika, software Kinovea, Shooting free throw.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.275 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Kesehatan OlahragaSame topicSports and Physical Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207