The Evaluation of the Modified Wave Periodization Model Efficiency on the Example of Young Soccer Players' Sprint Tests
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
The research aimed to evaluate the modified model of wave periodization efficiency in running speed tests conducted among soccer players aged 12 to 16. Participants included prospective players of a leading Polish top league soccer club. The research was carried out from 2018 to 2022 in June (Testing A) and December (Testing B) of each year. The test involved 30-m straight line running with 5-, 10-, and 30-m split time measurements. For this purpose, electronic photocells were used (FITLIGHT, Canada). The six-month training intervention increased the athletes' speed as there was a considerable decrease in the running time over the distance of 5 m (F = 7.86; p < 0.001), 10 m (F = 73.99; p < 0.001) and 30 m (F = 127.55; p < 0.001). Analysis of running performance of young soccer players aged 12-16 showed a significant improvement in speed at distances of 5, 10 and 30 m, confirming training effectiveness based on the wave periodization model. The negative correlation between testing year and performance suggests the influence of biological development on players' speed. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted training, which was reflected in reduced differences between test scores. Improving initial running technique can contribute to better match results, which emphasizes the need for an individual approach to the physical preparation of players.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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