The Influence of the Board Bending and Recoil Effect on Circus Performance in Korean Teeterboard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the recoil effect in jumping on a Korean teeterboard, a circus equipment resembling a seesaw. To our knowledge, our study is the first to include detailed measurements of bending movement of the teeterboard per section. Two elite acrobats performed 120 jumps while a motion capture system collected kinematic data from both acrobats and the teeterboard. Board bending angles and timing were analyzed with a Boosted Regression Tree (BRT) model to identify the most important teeterboard variables associated to jump height. The BRT model showed that both the board recoil effect and the landing of the opposite acrobat influenced 46% and 37% of the jump height, respectively. The recoil timing was found to be synchronized with the last contact at take-off. Coaches should encourage acrobats to take advantage of the recoil effect to increase jump height in Korean teeterboard.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".