Ventilatory Breakpoints in Boys and Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the ventilatory breakpoints during exercise between young boys and adult men. Twenty-four active volunteers, 12 boys (10.8 ± 0.3 years of age) and 12 men (24.6 ± 1.1 years of age) with similar aerobic power (53.6 ± 4.2 to 55.7 ± 3.5 mlkg−1min−1), participated in the study. Each participant completed a standardized Physical Activity Questionnaire and anthropometric variables were measured. The exercise testing consisted of two graded tests to exhaustion on a treadmill. Heart rates were recorded every minute and gas exchange parameters were obtained every 30 s throughout the tests. Each ventilatory breakpoint was determined using a three-part model. Although the relative VO2peak values were not significantly different between the boys and the young adults, the boys reported significantly (p < .05) higher total activity than the adults. The boys had a significantly higher (p > .05) first ventilatory breakpoint expressed as a percentage of VO2peak than the adults (64.9% vs. 57.7%). Only 50% of the boys demonstrated a discernable VB2, and the VB2 of this group was not significantly different from that of the adults.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".