Lactate et exercice : mythes et réalités
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Le présent exposé comprend deux parties. Chacune d’elles est présentée sous forme de questions auxquelles, à partir de données publiées, nous tentons d’apporter des réponses critiques et certaines réserves à des théories quelque fois trop hâtivement admises concernant les effets de l’acide lactique. La première partie est essentiellement consacrée à l’étude de la production et du devenir du lactate au cours ou à l’issue de l’exercice. Elle devrait permettre de mieux fonder n os critiques : sur certains a priori concernant les effets du lactate, sur les concepts de « seuils anaérobies lactiques » (S.A.L.) et sur les théories qui les sous tendent. La seconde est beaucoup plus appliquée aux conséquences supposées, mais non prouvées de l’accumulation lactique sur la fonction musculaire. Peut-on accepter encore aujourd’hui de soutenir que la glycolyse lactique a un mauvais rendement ? que l’accumulation lactique entraîne fatigue, crampes et autres douleurs musculaires retardées ?
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".