Bibliographic record
Abstract
The biomechanical comparison of a closed cell polyurethane and a traditional pneumatic bicycle road tires were investigated. The study consisted of 4 amateur cyclists and one former professional cyclist who attend the University of Ottawa. The study compared a closed cell polyurethane tire (Flatfree ™ Amerityre tires 700 C x 23mm, replicating ~97 psi) and a traditional pneumatic tire (Vredstein ® Recorso tires 700 C x 23mm) on bicycle rollers. The force required to pedal with the two different tires was recorded through the use of Tekscan F-scan ® Mobile piezo-electric insoles. It was determined that the total difference in force between the pneumatic tire and the Flatfree ™ tires is not found statistically different since P-value> 0.05 for both the series of 10 second sprints and 20 minute endurance trials. This displays that under these conditions the closed cell polyurethane tire does not provide a significant difference in performance when compared to the traditional pneumatic tire.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.882 | 0.768 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".