An Exploratory Examination of Families Engaged in an Adventure Running Kids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Academics and practitioners have only just begun to delve into the health benefits of outdoor activities in the last few years. In general, the forested settings of these activities have been documented to decrease stress levels, increase recovery rates from disease, and lessen the symptoms of mental illnesses (Kuo & Faber Taylor, 2004). It is believed that the natural environment acts as a setting where humans can engage in physical activity, aesthetic experiences, and social interactions that, in turn, release stress and lead to improved well-being (Bird, 2012). Currently, however, children are experiencing limited exposure to nature and which has been linked to lowered academic performance, ADHD, decreased mental health, and other adverse conditions (Louv, 2008a). The majority of current research on children and outdoor physical activity has occurred outside of Canada and North America (Casson, 2009). The purpose of the present study was to qualitatively explore the experiences of children, and their parents, who participated in an adventure running program in Southern Ontario. Adventure running is a new and unique sport that combines
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".