Measures of localized spinal muscle fatigue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the best variable, if any, to indicate the level of localized muscle fatigue. Six male and six female subjects were studied while they exerted their maximal voluntary contraction and 40% of maximal voluntary contraction of spinal extensors in an isometric lifting activity. The electromyography (EMG) of erectores spinae at thoracic and lumbar levels was measured bilaterally. Also, the muscle bed blood volume, level of blood oxygenation to erector spinae at L3 level and heart rate were measured. The initial and final values of subjective feelings of fatigue through visual analogue score, rate of perceived exertions and body part discomfort rating were recorded. The mean maximal voluntary contraction forces for males and females were 899 (238) N and 431 (135) N respectively. The mean durations of hold in maximal voluntary fatiguing contraction were 68.1 (39.9) s and 72.3 (37.0) s for men and women respectively. By the end of the hold the force declined to 52% for males and 62% for females. The EMG amplitudes and median frequencies also progressively declined (p < 0.01). ANOVA revealed that the task percentile values of all variables were significantly different (p < 0.01). Gender had a significant main effect (p < 0.01). The correlation coefficients between force and other individual variables were weak to modest, but significant (p < 0.001). None of the single variables predicted fatigue reliably for either gender and levels of contraction. The regression equations developed were highly significant (p < 0.01) and they explained 96 to 98% of variance in both genders and contractions.
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) | 0.000 | 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".