Athlete performance prediction based on time series analysis and implications for physical education and training strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, time series analysis is used to monitor and predict the performance of athletes in sports training.A smooth time series model , ARMA p q model is established, a fixed-order method based on autocorrelation function and partial correlation function is proposed, and the parameters of the model are estimated, and least squares prediction is used for model prediction.The monitoring test data of hemoglobin (HGB) in sports performance of Z athletes of a club were used as the research object, and the smooth time series test was conducted to determine the ARMA (1,1) model as the optimal time series fitting model, and the fitting effect was tested.In the application of blood oxygen saturation (BOS) index, ARMA (1,1) model can predict the trend of BOS of athlete Z with good application effect.Based on the prediction of athletes' performance by ARMA (1,1) model, this paper further proposes the integrated neuromuscular training method (INT), and integrates it with physical training will to develop the INT physical education training strategy.In the application experiment of INT physical education training strategy, the test results of the experimental group of athletes applying the INT physical education training strategy in the six events of T-test sensitive running, agility ladder, vestibular step, blindfolded one-legged standing, 30-meter sprint running, and 60-meter sprint running presented P<0.05, and the athletes' performance was significantly better than that of the control group.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".