The Voice of the Athlete in History: An Overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this overview, succinct information is provided on how the recognition of the voices of athletes has developed over decades. Processes of continuity and transformation are outlined, which serve to highlight and create interest in the topics of the full papers connected with this collection. Following this preparation for ‘stepping into the topic’, a rationale is also presented regarding the order and grouping of the various studies. In essence, the sequence is based around three perspectives, namely: the lives and biographical profiles of athletes; the decision-making processes of, and for, athletes; and the formal and informal institutional representation of athletes. While the touchstone is primarily on the voices of athletes associated with Olympic-related sports, brief consideration is also given to the actions and opinions of athletes expressed in other sporting spheres. The paper concludes with a summary and acknowledgement of the institutional collaborations which have underpinned this work.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".