MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133226348 · doi:10.1152/jappl.2000.88.5.1812

Kinetics of oxygen uptake at the onset of exercise near or above peak oxygen uptake

2000· article· en· W2133226348 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKineticsOxygenChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We tested the hypothesis that kinetics of O(2) uptake (VO(2)) measured in the transition to exercise near or above peak VO(2) (VO(2 peak)) would be slower than those for subventilatory threshold exercise. Eight healthy young men exercised at approximately 57, approximately 96, and approximately 125% VO(2 peak). Data were fit by a two- or three-component exponential model and with a semilogarithmic transformation that tested the difference between required VO(2) and measured VO(2). With the exponential model, phase 2 kinetics appeared to be faster at 125% VO(2 peak) [time constant (tau(2)) = 16.3 +/- 8.8 (SE) s] than at 57% VO(2 peak) (tau(2) = 29. 4 +/- 4.0 s) but were not different from that at 96% VO(2 peak) exercise (tau(2) = 22.1 +/- 2.1 s). VO(2) at the completion of phase 2 was 77 and 80% VO(2 peak) in tests predicted to require 96 and 125% VO(2 peak). When VO(2) kinetics were calculated with the semilogarithmic model, the estimated tau(2) at 96% VO(2 peak) (49.7 +/- 5.1 s) and 125% VO(2 peak) (40.2 +/- 5.1 s) were slower than with the exponential model. These results are consistent with our hypothesis and with a model in which the cardiovascular system is compromised during very heavy exercise.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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