MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402047476 · doi:10.5406/21558450.51.1.01

Using a Mixed-Methods Approach to Examine the Expanding Reach of Body Classification into the Twenty-First Century

2024· article· en· W4402047476 on OpenAlexaff
Aishwarya Ramachandran, Stephen M. Chignell, Yoonseok Choi, Patricia Vertinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport History · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article uses a mixed-methods approach combining historical inquiry and quantitative science mapping techniques to examine the expanding reach of the somatotype body measurement and classification system, based on posture photography and anthropometric measurements, well into the twenty-first century. It illuminates the persistence of deterministic thinking about the relationships between physique and athletic ability in physical education and sports science, as well as how these views evolve. While William Sheldon, founder of the somatotype system, increasingly shifted his research focus toward criminal anthropology, physical educators throughout the second half of the twentieth century found the somatotype useful for assessing the physique and performance of Olympic athletes, often drawing on a priori racial and ethnic categories. By the early 2000s, somatotype research was becoming increasingly popular internationally, focused mainly on the measurement and assessment of sporting talent through drawing correlations between body type and sports performance and relying on commonsense assumptions about the innateness of athletic ability. Missing, however, was a deeper consideration of the potential mechanisms or pathways driving these relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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 venueJournal of Sport HistorySame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207