Comparisons of player calibers and skate models during an ice hockey explosive transitional maneuver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ground (ice) reaction force and the plantar foot pressure variables were measured during an explosive transitional maneuver, stop and go, skating task on ice using: 1) regular hockey skate and 2) a modified skate with an altered tendon guard and eyelet configuration which allows for increased dorsiflexion and plantarflexion. The objective of this study was to describe the differences in skating mechanics and kinetics between high and low caliber skaters and between the two different skate models during the specific explosive transitional, stop and go, skating task. Both the left and right skates were instrumented with a calibrated strain gauge force transducer system to measure the ground (ice) reaction force and with an insole system used to measure the plantar foot pressure variables during the stop and go skating task. Similar CoP and vertical force results were observed between the two skate models; however, high caliber skaters showed a reduction of 10.7 (inside skate) and 15.2 (outside skate) mm in total antero-posterior CoP excursion during the stop phase (p<0.05). In conclusion, specific postural control patterns were observed between high and low caliber skaters. However, a full body kinematic study might be needed in order to study the exact biomechanical changes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".