Prediction of Vo <sub>2</sub> Peak Using OMNI Ratings of Perceived Exertion from a Submaximal Cycle Exercise Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to develop statistical models to predict peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak) using OMNI Ratings of Perceived Exertion measured during submaximal cycle ergometry. Male (M = 20.9 yr., SE = 0.4) and female (M = 21.6 yr., SE = 0.5) participants (N = 81) completed a load-incremented maximal cycle ergometer exercise test. Simultaneous multiple linear regression was used to develop separate VO2 peak statistical models using submaximal ratings of perceived exertion for the overall body, legs, and chest/breathing as predictor variables. VO2 peak (L·min(-1)) predicted for men and women from ratings of perceived exertion for the overall body (3.02 ± 0.06; 2.03 ± 0.04), legs (3.02 ± 0.06; 2.04 ± 0.04), and chest/breathing (3.02 ± 0.05; 2.03 ± 0.03) were similar to measured VO2 peak (3.02 ± 0.10; 2.03 ± 0.06, ps > .05). Statistical models based on submaximal OMNI Ratings of Perceived Exertion provide an easily administered and accurate method to predict VO2 peak.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".