MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100432418 · doi:10.1139/h03-001

A Comparison of Skating Economy On-Ice and On the Skating Treadmill

2003· article· en· W2100432418 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Applied Physiology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Safety, and Science Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSTRIDETreadmillIce hockeyHeart rateVO2 maxSpeed skatingAnimal scienceMathematicsMedicinePhysical therapyInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationSimulationEngineeringBlood pressureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to compare skating economy and oxygen uptake (VO2) on-ice and on the skating treadmill (TM). Male varsity hockey players (n = 15, age = 21.0 yr) performed skating tests on a TM and on-ice. The subjects skated for 4 min at each of 3 submaximal velocities (18, 20, and 22 km . h(-1)), separated by 5 min of passive recovery. A VO2max test followed the submaximal tests and commenced at 24 km . h(-1) with the velocity increasing by 1 km . h(-1) every minute until volitional fatigue. VO2 was 39.7, 42.9, 46.0, and 53.4 ml . kg(-1) . min(-1) at 18, 20, 22, and maximum speed (km . h(-1)) on the TM. VO2 was significantly lower (p < .05) 31.5, 36.9, and 42.7 ml . kg(-1) . min(-1) at 18, 20, and 22 km . h(-1) on-ice. The on-ice VO2max (54.7 ml . kg(-1) . min(-1)) was similar to TM. Stride rate, stride length and heart rate (HR) were significantly different on-ice compared to TM. These results show that at submaximal velocities, VO2, HR, and stride rate are higher on TM compared to on-ice. VO2max was similar while HRmax was higher on the skating treadmill compared to on-ice

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it