Muscle Strength and Contractile Kinetics of Isometric Elbow Flexion in Girls and Women
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
Ten prepubertal girls and 15 young women were tested for maximal torque, peak rate of torque development, electro-mechanical delay (EMD), and time to peak rate of torque development during isometric elbow flexion. Absolute peak torque (17.0 +/- 7.7 vs. 40.5 +/- 8.3 Nm) and peak rate of torque development (105.9 +/- 58.6 vs. 297.2 +/- 113.0 Nm s(-1)) were lower in the girls (p < .05). Normalized to muscle cross sectional area, torque was similar (8.27 +/- 2.74 vs. 8.44 +/- 1.65 Nm cm(-2)), as was peak rate of torque development, normalized to peak torque (6.21 +/- 1.94 vs. 7.30 +/- 2.26 Nm s(-1)/ Nm). Both, time to peak rate of torque development (123.8 +/- 36.0 vs. 110.5 +/- 52.6 ms) and EMD (73.2 +/- 28.6 vs. 51.9 +/- 25.6 ms), were longer in the girls, although EMD's difference only approached statistical significance (p = .06). Age-related isometric strength differences in females appear to be mainly muscle-size dependent. However, the time to peak torque and EMD findings suggest differential motor-unit activation which may functionally manifest itself in fast dynamic contractions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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