WEIGHT

By Davi Schmidt. 1976

The weight of 50,210 individuals was ascertained. The 5% who weighed least (54 kilograms or less) have been classed as under weight and the 5% who weighed most (85 kilograms or more) ab over weight. 55-84 kilograms was considered normal. Distribution of social groups (C.C. 0.083) shews 11s (fig. 121) that light weights and heavy weights tend to belong to the lower social groups. Psychscal function (C. c. 0.069) reveals no particular differences between medium and heavy weights but there is a clear tendency towards lower evaluations of psychical function amongst the light weight youths (fig. 122). As for emotional stabdity (C.C. 0.052) medium anti heat? weight:, have a normal distribution on the 5-grade evaluation scale of emotional stability (fig. 123). On other hand light weights clearly tend to have more low evaluations of emotional stability. This tendency is the same for psychical energy (C.C. 0.058), while social maturity (C.C. 0.052) shews a more positive distribution amongst medium and heavy weights with increased representation of higher evaluations of social maturity at the expense of lower evaluations, which dominate amongst those with light weight (fig. 124). Evaluations of intellectual capacity (C.C. 0.048) shew US that there is a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Improved protein structure prediction by deep learning irrespective of co-evolution information (2020, methodology): “We train our deep ResNet for 20 epochs using AdamW [39] and select the model with the minimum validation loss as our final model.”