MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414234766 · doi:10.1177/22150218251378667

Stabilizing rowing boats: Equilibrium rigging design

2025· article· en· W4414234766 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

VenueJournal of Sports Analytics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRowingControl theory (sociology)Oscillation (cell signaling)Design methodsOptimal designForcing (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To mitigate the persistent lateral oscillation of a rowing boat, various asymmetric rig designs have been implemented, even in Olympic competitions. Previous theoretical studies have operated under the unrealistic assumption that all rowers possess identical strength. This paper advances previous findings by scrutinizing the scenario where rowers exhibit heterogeneous strengths. Our study unveils a novel rig design feature: among the four designs for an eight-rower boat proposed by Barrow (2010), the design “uddu duud” uniquely satisfies the equilibrium condition for angular moments. This design is different from the German rig, “udud dudu,” utilized by Team Canada to win the Men’s Eight at the 2008 Summer Olympics. Furthermore, we enhance the analysis by incorporating stochastic noises.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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