MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409264144 · doi:10.52165/sgj.4.3.3

EDITORIAL

2012· editorial· en· W4409264144 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience of Gymnastics Journal · 2012
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhysical Education and Gymnastics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dear friends, Today we are celebrating our 10th issue of the Science of Gymnastics Journal. As this is our last issue in 2012 it is time to look back and evaluate the year. In 2012, we have published 20 articles and more than 17,000 people visited our web page. In August we received a Letter of Acceptance from the Elsevier's SCOPUS database. Along Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge, this is the most influential science database. Last year the Journal was entered in the Copernicus Index. For 2011, our score was 5.09 which place us in the top half of scientific journals in the physical education area. In SCOPUS and Web of Knowledge, the Journal has already been quoted by other researchers. This is a source of great pride for our team and we hope the trend will continue. For those of you who would like to quote the Journal – its abbreviation in Web of Knowledge is SCI GYMNASTICS J. Notice for authors and reviewers: from now on we are using ScholarOne ( http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/sgj ). The Olympic Games in London were the biggest event this year for gymnastics fans. I was in London and was thrilled to watch the gymnastics competitions (artistic, rhythmic, trampoline). The FIG President, Mr Bruno Grandi, made an excellent overview of the good and the bad sides of gymnastics at the Games. This may inspire researchers to analyze the bad sides so that we can improve our sport. Additionally, it would be interesting to study (in my opinion) the most difficult combination of elements ever performed from the motor control perspective. On the high bar, Epke Zonderland connected Casina, Kovacs and Kolman salto. Simon Trček, a talented young Slovenian photographer, took a number of excellent photos of Epke Zonderland during the FIG Challenge Cup in Maribor (Slovenia) in spring 2012 where Epke performed the same combination. Simon donated one of his photos to our Journal for you to enjoy Epke’s virtuosity and enourmous motor control. The first article in this issue is from the rhytmic gymnastics. Portugese authors Susana Corujeira, Rita Santos Silva, Tiago Vieira, Cláudia Dias, Eunice Lebre, and Carla Rêgo found that competitive gymnastics affects the body composition but does not appear to compromise the nutritional status, the normal progression of puberty, bone mass and genetically defined final height. These results question the concept of simultaneous presence of malnutrition, amenorrhea and osteoporosis (FAT). The second article is from Greece. Miltiadis Proios conducted a study on the athletic identity and achievement goals of gymnasts. The third article comes from Slovenia. Marjeta Kovač tested the reliability and objectivity of gymnastics knowledge tests for use in schools. Similar tests can also be used in other sports. The Portuguese, Canadian and Spanish team of authors: Lurdes Ávila-Carvalho, Panaginota Klentrou, Maria da Luz Palomero and Eunice Lebre, contributed the fourth article in which they analyzed handling, throws, catches and collaborations in elite group rhythmic gymnastics. The article offers a number of suggestions which could improve the Code of Points. The fifth article is from Slovenia and USA and deal with media and television in particular. Simon Ličen and Andrew C. Billings scrutinized Slovenian TV presenters reporting on gymnastics. The sixth article comes from Tunisia and United Kingdom; authors are from Bessem Mkaouer, Monem Jemni, Samiha Amara, Helmi Chaabèn and Zouhair Tabka; interesting article about take off from different tasks. The last article comes from a Slovak and Czech group of authors lead by Anton Gajdoš along with Marie Provaznikova, Karel Bednar and Stephen J. Banjak and is the continuation of their article in the previous issue on the 150th anniversary of the first Sokol Club in Prague. I wish you pleasant reading and a lot of inspiration for new research projects and articles. Ivan Čuk, Editor-in-Chief

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.360 · 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