MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409787680 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-294

AI-driven personalized training model for dance movement and health management research

2025· article· en· W4409787680 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDanceMovement (music)Training (meteorology)Computer sciencePsychologyKnowledge managementVisual artsHuman–computer interactionArtAestheticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a personalized scheme recommendation method for dance movements based on ontological similarity is proposed.An ontology model of trainers is established, and in order to explore the interactions between trainers' attribute features and their influence on core parameters, SWRL rules are established using Jena inference engine for the inference of core parameters of training programs.The similarity degree is calculated according to the different types of user variables respectively, and the artificial neural network model is used to determine the degree of similarity between different trainers, in order to complete the recommendation of personalized training programs for dance movements.And then the requirements of the system are summarized to achieve the framework construction of the personalized dance movement training program recommendation system to achieve the health management in the training process.The recommendation effects presented by the similarity calculation method of this paper have reached the design goal of this paper, and the personalized recommendation system of this paper has also significantly improved the physical fitness level and the performance effect of dance skills of the experimental group of dance trainees, and the success rate of the kicking back leg movement has reached 91.67%.However, the system's function of improving health knowledge and health awareness needs to be further upgraded.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicDiversity and Impact of DanceFrench-language works237,207