Effect of Selected Recovery Conditions on Performance of Repeated Bouts of Intermittent Cycling Separated by 24 Hours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of active recovery (AR), massage (MR), and cold water immersion (CR) on performance of repeated bouts of high-intensity cycling separated by 24 hours. For each recovery condition, subjects were asked to take part in 2 intermittent cycling sessions; 18 minutes of varying work intervals performed in succession at a resistance of 80 g/kg body weight separated by 24 hours. One of four 15-minute recovery conditions immediately followed the first session and included: (a) AR, cycling at 30% Vo(2)max; (b) CR, immersion of legs in a 15 degrees C water bath; (c) MR, massage of the legs; and (d) control, seated rest. Only the control condition showed a significant decline in the total work completed between the first and second exercise sessions (108.1 +/- 5.4 kJ vs. 106.0 +/- 5.0 kJ, p < 0.05). Thus, AR, MR, and CR appeared to facilitate the recovery process between 2 high-intensity, intermittent exercise sessions separated by 24 hours.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".