MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W155290800 · doi:10.1002/9781444300635.ch2

Adaptations to Training

2008· other· en· W155290800 on OpenAlexaff
Iñigo Mujika, Shona L. Halson, Nicholas A. Ratamess, Míkel Izquierdo, John A. Hawley, Gustavo A. Nader, Michael Kjær, Simon Doessing, Katja Peltola Mjøsund, Darren E. R. Warburton, A. William Sheel, Donald C. McKenzie, Pekka Kannus, Riku Nikander, Harri Sievänen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Physical Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndurance trainingAdaptation (eye)Strength trainingTraining (meteorology)Adaptive responseAthletesPhysiological AdaptationsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Practical considerations The future of fatigue Muscle perfomance adaptations to training Neural adaptations to training Muscular adaptations to training Objectives of training for enhancing athletic performance The training stimulus, response, and adaptation continuum Metabolic adaptations to endurance training Time-course of adaptive changes in skeletal muscle Goals of a strength training program Metabolic adaptations to strength training Performance adaptations to strength and endurance training Can strength training improve endurance performance? Sympatoadrenergic responses Growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-I Insulin and glucagon Reproductive hormones ACTH and cortisol Cytokines Conclusions: Endocrine adaptations to training in athletes Adaptation of bone to training Principles of skeletal adaptation to training Recommendations for improving bone strength through exercise Adaptation of connective tissue to training Adaptation of a tendon to training Adaptation of a ligament to training Conclusions References

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.009

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGenetics and Physical PerformanceFrench-language works237,207