The relative age effect in the European Weightlifting Championships 2015-2019 (male and female)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In terms of sporting activities, the relative age effect means the possible advantages of participation and performance of athletes who were born closer to the beginning of the year of selection corresponding to other athletes within the same age category. The aim of this study is to investigate the relative age effect on male and female athletes Olympic weightlifting athletes that participated in the European Weightlifting Championships from 2015 to 2019. Moreover, the study also aims to find out the birthdate quarter of elite athletes who ranked in the first three medalists in the championships.METHODS: This study examines the relative age effect on male (N.=1931) and female (N.=1514) weightlifting athletes who participated in the European Weightlifting Championships from 2015 to 2019 held by the European Weightlifting Federation. A traditional approach to analyze the data and to study the relative age effects is to categorize all participants into four quarters: Q1 (January to March); Q2 (April to June); Q3(July to September) and Q4 (October to December). To analyze the distribution of the participants by quarter, the Chi-square test was used. The level of significance was set at P<0.05.RESULTS: In male under 15 and youth age category, the rate of athletes born in the Q1 was observed to be higher than the rates of athletes born in the Q2, Q3 and Q4. In female groups, the rate of under 15 born in the Q2 was higher than the rate of the athletes born in the Q4 and the athletes born in the Q2 in junior age category was found to be higher than the rates of Q1, Q3 and Q4. It was also observed that the male athletes in under15 category that ranked in the first three medalists in weightlifting championships were born in the Q1, whereas the female athletes in junior category ranking in the first three medalists were born in the Q2.CONCLUSIONS: From our study findings, it was found that, irrespective of body weight categories, the relative age effects exist in both male (except junior and senior categories) and female weightlifting athletes (except youth and senior categories).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".