MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7135478406

Comparison of game skills between Czech, New Zealand and Canadian nation team of women's rugby

2017· dissertation· cs· W7135478406 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eva Zdeňková

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFootballCzechTheme (computing)BachelorFootball teamWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theme of the work: Comparison of game skills between Czech, New Zealand and Canadian nation team of women's rugby Student: Eva Zdeňková Supervisor: doc. PhDr. Jiří Suchý, Ph.D. Aims: The purpose of bachelor thesis is to found the biggest lack of game skills and the standard situations in Czech national team in comparison with studied teams and judge if skill errors of players are significant for the results of particular matches. Methodology: Firstly we work up assignments. With the help of the created stats we will compare differences in success of particular teams. Also we will ascertain if skill errors of players are significant for the results of matches. Results: There is no significant difference in between the game skills of Czech national team and both New Zealand or Canadian national teams. A slight difference could be seen in; passing, dynamics and continuity of a game. Those differences are not as visible as expected, therefore the more significant differences in between the observed teams, have been suspected to come up from players conditioning. Keywords: Rugby union, game skills, standard situation, game performance, individual error.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)→Same topicSports Performance and Training→French-language works237,207→