Image_1_A League-Wide Evaluation of Factors Influencing Match Activity Profile in Elite Australian Football.JPEG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Introduction: Accurate interpretation of activity profile data requires an understanding of the variables influencing player movement during matches.</p><p>Methods: Over 65,000 stints (player rotations) from all 207 matches of the 2018 Australian Football League (AFL) season were evaluated. The relative activity profile including total distance per minute (TD), high-speed running distance per minute (HSR) and Player Load<sup>TM</sup> per minute (PL) was determined for each stint and analysed against a range of match-related, player-related and environment-related predictor variables using multivariate linear mixed modelling. Effect size statistics along with the uncertainty in the estimates (95% confidence interval) were used to interpret the findings.</p><p>Results: The smallest important effects on TD, HSR, and PL were calculated as 1.5%, 5.5%, and 2.4%, respectively. Stint duration had small to moderate negative effects on TD (−6%), PL (−7.7%), and HSR (−13%), while recovery duration between stints had a small positive effect on HSR (+7%). There were moderate reductions in TD (−8%), HSR (−23%), and PL (−9.6%) in the last quarter compared to the first quarter of matches, while similar reductions existed in subsequent stints compared to the first stint in each quarter. Moderate to large differences of up to 9% in TD, 48% in HSR and 12% in PL existed between positions. The TD of less experienced players was slightly higher than their more experienced counterparts (2–3%). A 5% increase in body mass was associated with a small reduction in HSR (−5.5%). There were small reductions in TD (−2%), HSR (−10%), and PL (−3%) during the Finals Series compared to the Premiership Season. Moderate levels of rainfall during matches and higher apparent temperatures had small negative effects on TD (−2%) and HSR (−6 and −9%). The number of days break between matches, score margin, match outcome, ground hardness, ground size, and traveling for the current or the previous match had trivial effects on the activity profile.</p><p>Conclusion: Player position and stage of the match (quarter) had the largest effects on match activity profile while stint duration, recovery duration, stint timing, professional experience, body mass, stage of the season, and weather conditions also had substantial effects.</p>
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.065 | 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".