Bibliographic record
Abstract
In mammals and birds, all oxygen used (VO2) must pass through the lungs; hence, some degree of coupling between VO2 and pulmonary ventilation (VE) is highly predictable. Nevertheless, VE is also involved with CO2 elimination, a task that is often in conflict with the convection of O2. In hot or cold conditions, the relationship between VE and VO2 includes the participation of the respiratory apparatus to the control of body temperature and water balance. Some compromise among these tasks is achieved through changes in breathing pattern, uncoupling changes in alveolar ventilation from VE. This article examines primarily the relationship between VE and VO2 under thermal stimuli. In the process, it considers how the relationship is influenced by hypoxia, hypercapnia or changes in metabolic level. The shuffling of tasks in emergency situations illustrates that the constraints on VE-VO2 for the protection of blood gases have ample room for flexibility. However, when other priorities do not interfere with the primary goal of gas exchange, VE follows metabolic rate quite closely. The fact that arterial CO2 remains stable when metabolism is changed by the most diverse circumstances (moderate exercise, cold, cold and exercise combined, variations in body size, caloric intake, age, time of the day, hormones, drugs, etc.) makes it unlikely that VE and metabolism are controlled in parallel by the condition responsible for the metabolic change. Rather, some observations support the view that the gaseous component of metabolic rate, probably CO2, may provide the link between the metabolic level and VE.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".