Have we underestimated the kinematic and kinetic benefits of non-ballistic motion?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Explosive upper-body movements, with which the load is not thrown (non-ballistic), may comprise a phase during which forces are produced in opposition to the motion of the load. Thirty men completed three test sessions (free weight, ballistic, and pneumatic), each consisting of a one-repetition maximum (1-RM) and four explosive repetitions of a bench press at six loads (15, 30, 45, 60, 75, and 90% 1-RM). The end of the lifting phase for the non-ballistic conditions (free weight and pneumatic) was defined by: the point of peak barbell displacement and the point at which the vertical force became negative (positive work). When analysed by peak displacement, the ballistic condition elicited significantly greater mean velocity, force, and power at loads of 15-60% 1-RM compared with the free weight condition. When the period of negative work was removed, the mean free weight velocity, force, and power at loads below 60% 1-RM increased. Consequently, the only differences between the free weight and ballistic conditions were found at loads of 15% and 30% 1-RM. Including a period of negative work may underestimate all kinematic and kinetic variables dependent on the time to, or position of, the end of the lifting phase, for non-ballistic efforts.
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 | 0.038 | 0.194 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".