A Machine Learning Approach to Finding the Fastest Race Course for Professional Athletes Competing in Ironman® 70.3 Races between 2004 and 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our purpose was to find the fastest race courses for elite Ironman® 70.3 athletes, using machine learning (ML) algorithms. We collected the data of all professional triathletes competing between 2004 and 2020 in Ironman 70.3 races held worldwide. A sample of 16,611 professional athletes originating from 97 different countries and competing in 163 different races was thus obtained. Four different ML regression models were built, with gender, country of origin, and event location considered as independent variables to predict the final race time. For all the models, gender was the most important variable in predicting finish times. Attending to the single decision tree model, the fastest race times in the Ironman® 70.3 World Championship of around ~4 h 03 min would be achieved by men from Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Switzerland, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, South Africa, Canada, and New Zealand. Considering the World Championship is the target event for most professional athletes, it is expected that training is planned so that they attain their best performance in this event.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".