MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409769601 · doi:10.1080/11745398.2025.2494091

‘To others it’s just tape': exploring meaning making and the striping system in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu

2025· article· en· W4409769601 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary Towns, Mark Norman

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Leisure Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFashion and Cultural Textiles
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData stripingMeaning (existential)AdvertisingAestheticsArtSociologyPsychologyBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (BJJ) instruction typically focuses on its self defense, competition, fitness and fun. Practitioners earn and progress through coloured belts to signify skill within the sport. Although existing research has explored how the promotion to a new belt is symbolically significant enough to warrant a ceremony, to our knowledge, little academic focus has unpacked the constructed meaning of BJJ ‘stripes’ – a piece of white tape that practitioners earn and wear on their current belt to signify progress between belts. Using symbolic interactionist perspectives, we identify a BJJ ‘online community of practice’ that has developed on message boards and Facebook groups dedicated to amateur BJJ; and analyse how community members discuss the significance of ‘stripes’ as tied to achievement, perseverance, and self-identity. BJJ ‘stripes’ represent a unique part of sport dress and help formulate a collective identity among BJJ participants that contributes to the sport’s unique culture.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.031
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.522
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.073 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Leisure ResearchSame topicFashion and Cultural TextilesFrench-language works237,207