MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Las competiciones olímpicas en el origen de la igualdad entre hombres y mujeres: la opinión de Myrtle Cook, periodista de Montreal, 1929-1960

2016· article· es· W35421613 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Élise Detellier

Bibliographic record

VenueTendencias pedagógicas · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports and Physical Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtTrainer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myrtle Cook fue medallista de oro de atletismo en los Juegos Olímpicos de Amsterdam en 1928, miembro fundadora de asociaciones deportivas femeninas, entrenadora y periodista, Myrtle Cook (1902-1985) dedicó su vida al deporte femenino. Este trabajo trata sobre su carrera periodística que se desarrolló entre 1929 y 1960. Específicamente se centra en la manera en la que utilizó sus crónicas para hacer valer sus ideas sobre la participación de las mujeres en el deporte, es decir en la superación de las deportistas que participaban en las competiciones de alto nivel, sobre todo en los Juegos Olímpicos.Palabras clave: Juegos Olímpicos, Myrtle Cook. OLYMPIC COMPETITIONS AT THE START OF MEN AND WOMEN EQUALITY. THE VIEW OF A 1929-1960 MONTREAL JOURNALIST: MYRTLE COOK Myrtle Cook was an athletics gold medal winner in the Amsterdam Olympic Games 1928, founder member of women sport associations, trainer and journalist. Myrtle Cook (1929-1985) devoted her life to women sport. This paper deals with her career as a journalist which spanned from 1929 till 1960. It particularly focuses on the use she made of her reports to assert her own ideas on the participation of women in sport, that is to say, the strive of sport women who participated in high-performance sporting competitions, mainly in Olympic Games.Key words: Olympic Games, Myrtle Cook.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.365 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTendencias pedagógicasSame topicSports and Physical Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207