MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388913387 · doi:10.22215/cjcr.v10i2.4369

Canada Soccer and the Right to Play

2023· article· en· W4388913387 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Steve Gennaro

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfants · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingPublic relationsContext (archaeology)PsychologyRelevance (law)Political scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the world's most popular sport, soccer holds significant relevance for today's youth. In Canada, soccer surpasses other sports in terms of children's participation, promoting physical and mental health, essential life skills, and a sense of community. This article explores the right to play and the importance of play for Canadian children's overall well-being and development. It emphasizes the responsibility of communities and governments to ensure access to safe and inclusive play environments, particularly in organized sports like soccer. The article further explores the role of coaches, the need for safe spaces, and the impact of cultural context in shaping children's development. Recommendations are proposed, including enhanced regulation of coaching and player development using a rights-based approach and the integration of children's perspectives in decision-making processes. By fostering a culture of inclusivity and prioritizing the right to play, Canada can empower its children to thrive physically, cognitively, emotionally, and socially, equipping them with essential skills for success in a rapidly changing world.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Children s Rights / Revue canadienne des droits des enfantsSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207