Physiological responses and energy cost during a simulation of a Muay Thai boxing match
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Muay Thai is a martial art that requires complex skills and tactical excellence for success. However, the energy demand during a Muay Thai competition has never been studied. This study was devised to obtain an understanding of the physiological capacities underlying Muay Thai performance. To that end, the aerobic energy expenditure and the recruitment of anaerobic metabolism were assessed in 10 male athletes during a simulation match of Muay Thai. Subjects were studied while wearing a portable gas analyzer, which was able to provide data on oxygen uptake, carbon dioxide production, and heart rate (HR). The excess of CO2 production (CO2 excess) was also measured to obtain an index of anaerobic glycolysis. During the match, group energy expenditure was, on average (mean +/- standard error of the mean), 10.75 +/- 1.58 kcal.min-1, corresponding to 9.39 +/- 1.38 metabolic equivalents. Oxygen uptake and HRs were always above the level of the anaerobic threshold assessed in a preliminary incremental test. CO2 excess showed an abrupt increase in the first round, and reached a value of 636 +/- 66.5 mL.min-1. This parameter then gradually decreased throughout the simulation match. These data suggest that Muay Thai is a physically demanding activity with great involvement of both the aerobic metabolism and anaerobic glycolysis. In particular, it appears that, after an initial burst of anaerobic glycolysis, there was a progressive increase in the aerobic energy supply. Thus, training protocols should include exercises that train both aerobic and anaerobic energetic pathways.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".