MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396774587 · doi:10.1177/17479541241246951

Critical speed models of high-resolution speed-duration profiles describe peak running demands in soccer

2024· article· en· W4396774587 on OpenAlexaff
Eliran Mizelman, Aaron Pearson, Dani Chu, David C. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Science & Coaching · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsCanadian Sport Centre PacificUniversité de MontréalSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuration (music)SimulationComputer sciencePhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to characterize critical speed (CS) models for summarizing high-resolution speed-duration profiles from GPS tracking data obtained from soccer players. GPS data from 15 male NCAA Division I soccer players were collected during practices and games over a 6-week period. Moving averages of the speed data were computed for each file for duration windows spanning 0.1 to 600 seconds at 0.1-second resolution. Speed-duration profiles for each session and for the entire sampling period (“global”) were generated for each player by selecting the maximal mean speeds for each duration. Four models were fit to the profiles: the two-parameter CS (CS2) model, the three-parameter CS (CS3) model, the omni-domain speed-duration (OmSD) model, and the five-parameter logistic (5PL) model. The 5PL, CS3, and OmSD models exhibited similar goodness of fits, and all outperformed the CS2 model. Similar CS estimates were obtained for each model, whereas maximum speed ( S max ) estimates were lower for OmSD compared to the 5PL. Players exhibited a range of parameter values for CS, D′, and S max . S max and CS estimated from session-specific speed-duration profiles were on average higher for games compared to practices. We conclude that CS models are useful for empirically describing speed-duration profiles and for assessing peak running demands for soccer practices and games. The proposed approach could help coaches design practice activities to better mimic game demands.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Science & CoachingSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207