MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7095107055

A CASE STUDY OF OLYMPIC, WORLD AND COMMONWEALTH SCULLING CHAMPION

2006· article· en· W7095107055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChampionCommonwealthRowingAmateurGovernment (linguistics)EliteQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ii This thesis is a biographical case study of Olympic, World and Commonwealth sculling champion Peter Antonie, whose career at the elite or high performance level spanned some 23 years – from 1977 to 2000. The thesis examines the exploits of an oarsman and sculler regarded within his sport as one of Australia’s greatest ever, despite his being considered physically disadvantaged at every phase of his career. Antonie was, most notably, a man of small stature – widely considered a handicap at the level of rowing to which he aspired, and at which he ultimately succeeded. The study also examines what it was, despite those perceived disadvantages, that drove him to excel. The thesis further examines, in thematic form, parallel developments within Australian rowing and sculling in the quarter of a century in which Peter Antonie competed. This was a period during which fundamental changes were seen in Australian sport, notably in the areas of funding and administration, and which saw a transformation from amateur to professional

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSports, Gender, and Society→French-language works237,207→