The level of the aggression in karate athletes with different handedness and belt grades
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
Karate athletes with different lateral talents possess different functions in terms of skills and personality characteristics in a way that handedness can be considered an advantage. Given that there is a paucity of research in the domain of personality characteristics, handedness and belt grades, the current research aims to investigate the relationship between handedness and belt grades with aggression among karate athletes. 120 male karate athletes participated. To measure handedness, we used Annette’s handedness questionnaire and to measure aggression, we used Bredemeier’s aggression questionnaire. The questionnaires were distributed among participants one day before the tournament. A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to measure the effects of belt grades and handedness on the level of aggression. The results of the study indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in the average level of aggression between left-handed and right-handed karate athletes. There was also no statistically significant difference in the average level of aggression between karate athletes with different belt grades.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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