MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405735881

STUDIES REGARDING THE RHYTHMIC GYMNASTICS FROM THE OLYMPIC GAMES

2013· article· en· W4405735881 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pelin R.A.

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhythmic gymnasticsRhythmPsychologyMathematics educationArtAesthetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rhythmic Gymnastics, a symbiosis of art, aesthetic and beauty, paired with the highest performances, is a true women's sport and belongs amongst the most attractive and beautiful disciplines. The main characteristic of Rhythmic Gymnastics as a compositional discipline is the connection of the most difficult acrobatic movement elements which require a very high corporal flexibility and motor activity and which are presented by the gymnasts in perfect harmony with the music chosen for the exercise. Femininity and elegance as well as the artistic expression of the gymnasts never fail to fascinate the public.The first Olympic Games to feature Rhythmic Gymnastics as a discipline of its own were in 1984 in Los Angeles (USA). Only individual gymnasts were allowed to participate. With the exception of Romania, every eastern European country was absent. The first ever Olympic title went to Lori Fung from Canada.In 1996, Atlanta (USA) welcomed the first Group competition, in which Spain would triumph over Bulgaria and Russia.The purpose of this study is to present maximum dynamic performance of nations in the eight Olympic Games editions, since rhytmic gymnastics was included in the Olympic program.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.334
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.154 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207