Opportunities, Dilemmas and Innovative Paths for Youth Sports Training in Chengdu under the "Double Reduction" and "Double Increase" Policies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article uses research methods such as literature, expert interviews and field visits to study the development of youth sports training in Chengdu. This paper conducts research on how the two policies of "double reduction" and "double increase" change the operating environment of the youth sports training market in Chengdu, and how these changes affect the development prospects of the market. The study found that this policy has brought new development opportunities to the youth sports training market in Chengdu, but it also faces some challenges. To address these challenges, we have proposed a series of innovative paths, including measures such as improving government supervision mechanisms, optimizing market management, unifying coaching qualification certification standards and standardizing coaching promotion channels, and strengthening school-enterprise cooperation. We hope that through this research, we can provide valuable reference for relevant policymakers and training institutions, and provide predictions for future market development trends.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it