The Difference between the Basal Metabolic Rate and the Sleeping Metabolic Rate in Japanese
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have demonstrated the difference between the basal metabolic rate (BMR) and the sleeping metabolic rate (SMR): however, the difference in the Japanese population has not yet been explored. This study examined the relationship between the BMR and SMR in ninety-four healthy Japanese subjects (37 males and 57 females, 39 +/- 12 y of age and 22.0 +/- 7.4% body fat) in a respiratory chamber. The SMR was significantly lower than the BMR (1416 +/- 245 vs. 1492 +/- 256 kcal/d): however, there was a highly significant correlation between the two (r = 0.867; p < 0.001). The ratio of SMR/BMR largely varied among individuals (0.95 +/-0.08, 8.4% of the coefficient of variation). The ratio was significantly lower in males than in females (0.93 +/- 0.10 vs. 0.97 +/- 0.06, p < 0.05). None of the anthropometric measures (age, weight, body mass index, body surface area or percent body fat) correlated with the ratio. These results showed that SMR was 95%, of BMR on average in a healthy Japanese group. However, when applied over a longer time period (24 h or more), the difference tends to become negligible for most analyses in a group. Although the difference between SMR and BMR will induce a 5% gap of physical activity level defined as the total energy expenditure divided by the BMR or SMR, this factor seems to have little practical importance in epidemiological research.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".