ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Wesam Al Attar singularity evaluation-infinity: a predictive simulation framework for motor intent collapse in athletes.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sustainable athletic performance requires maintaining motor intent stability under physiological stress. Current injury prediction approaches focus on isolated biomechanical markers rather than integrated physiological system dynamics. Objective: To develop and validate through comprehensive simulation the Wesam Al Attar Singularity evaluation-infinity (WASe-∞) framework for predicting motor intent collapse by integrating neuromuscular, cognitive, and coordination factors into a unified risk assessment model with clear pathways for empirical validation. Methods: A rigorous simulation-based approach was employed using parameters derived from published biomechanics datasets. The WASe-∞ framework integrates five physiological domains through a weighted convergence equation with coefficients derived through systematic three-stage optimization including comprehensive sensitivity analysis. The foundational model was validated using 60 simulated athlete profiles across four sports over 60-minute sessions, generating 360,000 data points for analysis with built-in AI integration capabilities. Results: The WASe-∞ framework achieved strong predictive performance within the controlled simulation environment with an area under the curve of 0.930 and 95% confidence interval of 0.915-0.946. Risk stratification revealed realistic distributions: 20.5% low-risk, 58.2% moderate-risk, 20.0% high-risk, and 1.4% critical-risk measurements. Sport-specific differences emerged with swimming showing highest mean scores (0.727 ± 0.210) and running lowest (0.605 ± 0.178), consistent with epidemiological data indicating elevated shoulder injury risk in competitive swimmers (40%-70% prevalence). Strong factor correlations supported theoretical foundations with comprehensive sensitivity analysis confirming framework robustness (AUC remained >0.90 for coefficient variations up to ±15%). Conclusion: This foundational study establishes the WASe-∞ framework as a theoretically robust foundation for future empirical validation with human athletic populations. The simulation-based validation demonstrates strong theoretical validity while providing clear performance benchmarks and detailed protocols for subsequent real-world validation studies. The framework's architecture positions it for integration with emerging multimodal sensor technologies, representing a critical step toward transforming injury prevention from reactive treatment to proactive risk management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.