MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280548694 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.878515

Research on the Construction and Prediction of China's National Fitness Development Index System Under Social Reform

2022· article· en· W4280548694 on OpenAlexaff
Zheng Liu, Shijia Zhang, Lingling Li, Bin Hu, Ran Liu, Zhao Zhao, Yuanjun Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEnvironmental Engineering and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersJilin Office of Philosophy and Social ScienceScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBalanced scorecardIndex (typography)ChinaPhysical fitnessPlan (archaeology)CombingComputer scienceOperations researchProcess managementBusinessPolitical scienceMedicineGeographyEngineeringPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: National fitness is a development plan formulated by China to promote people's participation in leisure and fitness, enhance people's physique, and realize the general goal of strengthening sports. Methods: Based on combing the development process of China's national fitness after reform and opening up, using the improved "balanced scorecard" method, this article constructs an evaluation index system of the national fitness development index. Results: The national fitness development index was established, including 4 first-level indicators, 14 second-level indicators, and 49 third-level indicators. It can calculate the national fitness development index with a total score of 100 points. Conclusion: To verify the feasibility of the evaluation system, the goal current situation evaluation method is used to calculate the national fitness development index during the 14th Five Year Plan period based on the development of national fitness during the 13th Five Year Plan period to provide evaluation tools and theoretical reference for the development of national fitness in China.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicEnvironmental Engineering and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207