MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Anatomy of Olympic Amateurism

2017· book· en· W4235492916 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew P. Llewellyn, John Gleaves

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Illinois Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominionAmateurGlobeAdventureHistoryVictorian eraMedia studiesAncient historySociologyArt historyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter traces the origins and development of amateurism, from the plans to revive the Olympic Games of classical Greek antiquity in 1894 through its global diffusion. Though often misattributed to ancient Greece, amateurism was a distinctly modern invention born in Great Britain during the latter half of the nineteenth century. A holistic and loosely articulated set of ideas, beliefs, and practices, amateurism is commonly defined as being “about doing things for the love of them, doing them without reward or material gain or doing them unprofessionally.” The amateur played the game for the game's sake, disavowed gambling and professionalism, and competed in a composed, dignified manner. From its institutional seedbed in Victorian Britain, amateurism traveled the sporting globe, from the cosmopolitan Dominion cities of Cape Town, Sydney, and Toronto to distant British imperial outposts in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, Southeast Asia, and beyond. Like the spread of modern sports and games, the British diffused amateurism via a series of interrelated mechanisms: notably, the public schools, the economic and industrial system, the imperial British army, the evangelical and muscular Christianity movements, and a vast literary network of sporting journals, male adventure stories, and imperial tracts.

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)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Illinois Press eBooksSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207