Heart Rate Variability, QT Variability, and Electrodermal Activity during Exercise
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Various measures of autonomic function have been developed, and their applicability and significance during exercise are controversial. METHODS: Physiological data were therefore obtained from 23 sport students before, during, and after exercise. Measures of R-R interval variability, QT variability index (QTvi), and electrodermal activity (EDA) were calculated. We applied an incremental protocol applying 70%, 85%, 100%, and 110% of the individual anaerobic threshold for standardized comparison. RESULTS: Although HR increased stepwise, parasympathetic parameters such as the root mean square of successive differences were not different during exercise and do not mirror autonomic function satisfactorily. Similar results were observed with the approximate entropy of R-R intervals (ApEnRR). In contrast, the increase in sympathetic activity was well reflected in the EDA, QTvi, and ApEn of the QT interval (ApEnQT)/ApEnRR ratio. CONCLUSION: We suggest that linear and nonlinear parameters of R-R variability do not adequately reflect vagal modulation. Sympathetic function can be assessed by EDA, QTvi, or ApEnQT/ApEnRR ratio.
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 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 | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it