Theory of Reasoned Action, the Theory of
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ological evidence indicates that regular aer-obic physical activity has substantial bene-fits for the cardiovascular and other sys-tems of the body.1,2 Specific health benefits of regular physical activity and fitness include reduced risk of all-cause mortality and several specific conditions.3-5 In addi-tion, physical activity has been shown to be inversely related to depression, anxiety, and stress.6-8 Despite the substantial benefits associat-ed with involvement in physical activity, studies have shown that the majority of Canadians are sedentary. It has been esti-mated that only 11 % of Canadians engage in aerobic activity three to four times a week, for 30 minutes or more at 50 % or more of individual capacity (requirement for cardiovascular benefit).9 In Ontario it has been estimated that just over 67 % of the population are inactive (those averag-ing less than 1.5 kcal/kg/day of estimated energy expenditure).10 Several theoretical frameworks and con-cepts have been used to explain and predict physical activity participation, such as: the
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".