The initial phase of exercise hyperpnoea in humans is depressed during a cognitive task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased wakefulness is known to suppress the initial ventilatory response to passive movement and the steady-state ventilatory response to exercise. However, the effect of increased wakefulness upon the integrated ventilatory response at the onset of exercise is not known. We hypothesized that increasing wakefulness via a cognitive task would attenuate the initial ventilatory response to exercise, and so we examined the response to active leg extensions under two conditions: with and without concurrently solving a puzzle. At rest before exercise, subjects demonstrated greater minute ventilation while solving a puzzle (mean +/- S.E.M., 12.38 +/- 0.55 versus 10.12 +/- 0.51 l min(-1), P < 0.001), due to a higher mean breathing frequency (mean +/- S.E.M., 17.1 +/- 0.93 versus 13.6 +/- 0.59 breaths min(-1), P < 0.001). At the start of exercise, subjects did not increase their ventilation significantly while solving the puzzle (P = 0.170), but did by a mean +/-s.e.m. of 6.16 +/- 1.12 l min(-1) (P < 0.001) when not puzzle solving. The ventilation achieved at the start of exercise in absolute terms was also lower while solving the puzzle (14.6 +/- 1.1 versus 16.3 +/- 1.3 l min(-1), P = 0.047). Despite differences in the rapid ventilatory response to exercise between conditions, the steady-state responses were not different. We conclude that the performance of a cognitive task decreases the initial phase of exercise hyperpnoea, and suggest that this might occur because of either a competitive interaction between drives to breathe or a behavioural distraction from the 'task' of exercise.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".