Ventilatory response during an incremental exercise test: A mode of testing effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study compared ventilation patterns during incremental load tests to exhaustion. Ten endurance trained individuals and eight recreationally active trained individuals underwent a maximal oxygen uptake ( O2max) determination test on both a cycle (CE) and treadmill (TM) ergometer. Cardiorespiratory variables O2, CO2, RER, E, and R), movement frequency (MF) and entrainment (ENT) were collected and calculated relative to fixed percentages of O2max (isometabolic), ranging from 60 to 100%. Minute ventilation ( E) was similar between groups on both ergometers. Concurrently, VT was significantly higher, while R was significantly lower on the CE compared to the TM in both groups (P<0.05). At isometabolic intensities there were no difference in R or ENT between groups or mode of testing while the endurance trained group reached higher VT values on the CE. Although the endurance trained group reached higher cardiorespiratory values compared to the recreationally active trained group, their ventilatory patterns were similar between modes of testing. These results seem to be dependent on the exercise modality and not necessarily the type of training individuals regularly participate in.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".