MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Skill transfer through multi-sport play: A tennis and hockey example

2021· article· en· W4205089587 on OpenAlexaff
E. Paul Roetert, Ola Malmqvist, Karl Davies, Richard Way

Bibliographic record

VenueITF Coaching & Sport Science Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsFriends For Life
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyPsychologyLiteracyComputer sciencePedagogyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of “skill transfer” is introduced with the sports of ice hockey and tennis as examples. Skill transfer is addressed with a backdrop and understanding that it is based on existing concepts that have been researched significantly over the past few decades. They include Physical Literacy, Early Sport Specialization and Long-Term Athlete Development. Specific commonalities and skill benefits are highlighted. This inclusive, unified approach may serve as a catalyst to a better understanding of the benefits of skill transfer as well as the benefits of learning physical activities through two sport examples on multiple surfaces.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.322 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueITF Coaching & Sport Science ReviewSame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207