A Comparison of Skating Economy On-Ice and On the Skating Treadmill
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".