Evaluation of Muscle Activity for Loaded and Unloaded Dynamic Squats during Vertical Whole-Body Vibration
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to examine if the addition of a light external load would enhance whole-body vibration (WBV)-induced increases in muscle activity during dynamic squatting in 4 leg muscles. Thirteen recreationally active male university students performed a series of dynamic squats (unloaded with no WBV, unloaded with WBV, loaded with no WBV, and loaded with WBV). The load was set to 30% of body mass and WBV included 25-, 35-, and 45-Hz frequencies with 4-mm amplitude. Muscle activity was recorded with surface electromyography (EMG) on the vastus lateralis (VL), biceps femoris (BF), tibialis anterior (TA), and gastrocnemius (GC) and is reported as EMGrms (root mean square) normalized to %maximal voluntary exertion. During unloaded dynamic squats, exposure to WBV (45 Hz) significantly (p < 0.05) increased baseline muscle activity in all muscles, except the TA compared with no WBV. Adding a light external load without WBV increased baseline muscle activity of the squat exercise in all muscles but decreased the TA. This loaded level of muscle activity was further increased with WBV (45 Hz) in all muscles. The WBV-induced increases in muscle activity in the loaded condition (approximately 3.5%) were of a similar magnitude to the WBV-induced increases during the unloaded condition (approximately 2.5%) demonstrating the addition of WBV to unloaded or loaded dynamic squatting results in an increase in muscle activity. These results demonstrate the potential effectiveness of using external loads with exposure to WBV.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Bench or experimental | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Bench or experimental | medium |
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it