MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimating instantaneous energetic cost during non-steady-state gait

2014· article· en· W1974860030 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica C. Selinger, J. Maxwell Donelan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy costSteady state (chemistry)GaitControl theory (sociology)SimulationMathematicsComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationChemistryEngineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Respiratory measures of oxygen and carbon dioxide are routinely used to estimate the body's steady-state metabolic energy use. However, slow mitochondrial dynamics, long transit times, complex respiratory control mechanisms, and high breath-by-breath variability obscure the relationship between the body's instantaneous energy demands (instantaneous energetic cost) and that measured from respiratory gases (measured energetic cost). The purpose of this study was to expand on traditional methods of assessing metabolic cost by estimating instantaneous energetic cost during non-steady-state conditions. To accomplish this goal, we first imposed known changes in energy use (input), while measuring the breath-by-breath response (output). We used these input/output relationships to model the body as a dynamic system that maps instantaneous to measured energetic cost. We found that a first-order linear differential equation well approximates transient energetic cost responses during gait. Across all subjects, model fits were parameterized by an average time constant (τ) of 42 ± 12 s with an average R(2) of 0.94 ± 0.05 (mean ± SD). Armed with this input/output model, we next tested whether we could use it to reliably estimate instantaneous energetic cost from breath-by-breath measures under conditions that simulated dynamically changing gait. A comparison of the imposed energetic cost profiles and our estimated instantaneous cost demonstrated a close correspondence, supporting the use of our methodology to study the role of energetics during locomotor adaptation and learning.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations148
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207