L'étude des voies de sécrétion des cellules AtT20 l'association amylase d'orge et calreticuline dans le trafic distal de la glycoprotéine
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Purpose] This study aimed to compare the results of two questionnaires administered in 2013 and 2020, on the level of awareness and understanding of trunk muscle training. [Participants and Methods] In total, 238 soccer club members in high schools responded to our questionnaire regarding trunk muscle training. Two teams were recruited from the top (top 4), middle (top 16), and bottom levels (first-round losers), according to the prefectural tournament's results in 2019. This questionnaire comprised questions divided into four parts: 1. Prevalence of trunk muscle training; 2. Knowledge of the classification of trunk muscles (local and global); 3. Consciousness of local and global muscles during trunk muscle training; and 4. Knowledge of the role of each muscle. These results were compared to those obtained from the survey in 2013. [Results] A significant difference was observed only in the responses to question 2. Regarding question 2 in 2020, several student-athletes in the top-level teams were aware of muscle classification compared to those in the middle- and lower-level teams. [Conclusion] The number of athletes who understood the classification of trunk muscles increased significantly in 2020. Therefore, in the future, we would need to better educate young athletes concerning the purpose of trunk muscle training and the role of each muscle.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it