MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131662444 · doi:10.1111/jpn.12391

Using heart rate to predict energy expenditure in large domestic dogs

2015· article· en· W2131662444 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nadine Gerth, Britta Dobenecker, Sven Reese, J. Matthias Starck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy expenditureHeart rateRegression analysisTreadmillLinear regressionAnimal scienceRegressionMathematicsMetabolic rateStatisticsMedicinePhysical therapyInternal medicineBlood pressureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to establish heart rate as a measure of energy expenditure in large active kennel dogs (28 ± 3 kg bw). Therefore, the heart rate (HR)-oxygen consumption (V˙O2) relationship was analysed in Foxhound-Boxer-Ingelheim-Labrador cross-breds (FBI dogs) at rest and graded levels of exercise on a treadmill up to 60-65% of maximal aerobic capacity. To test for effects of training, HR and V˙O2 were measured in female dogs, before and after a training period, and after an adjacent training pause to test for reversibility of potential effects. Least squares regression was applied to describe the relationship between HR and V˙O2. The applied training had no statistically significant effect on the HR-V˙O2 regression. A general regression line from all data collected was prepared to establish a general predictive equation for energy expenditure from HR in FBI dogs. The regression equation established in this study enables fast estimation of energy requirement for running activity. The equation is valid for large dogs weighing around 30 kg that run at ground level up to 15 km/h with a heart rate maximum of 190 bpm irrespective of the training level.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Physiology and Animal NutritionSame topicCardiovascular Conditions and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207