Differences in gender and performance in off-road triathlon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of this study were: (1) to examine performance trends and compare elite male and female athletes at the off-road triathlon (1.5-km swim, 30-km mountain biking, and 11-km trail running) world championships since its inception in 1996, and (2) to compare gender-related differences between off-road triathlon and conventional road-based triathlon. Linear regression analyses and ANOVA were used to examine performance trends and differences between the sexes. Elite male performance times stabilized over the 2005-2009 period, whereas elite female performance times continued to improve, especially for the run leg. Differences in performance times between the sexes were less marked in swimming than in mountain biking and running, whereas differences in power output were more marked for mountain biking than for swimming and running. In addition, differences in cycling between the sexes were greater for off-road than conventional on-road triathlon. The specific aspects of mountain biking (e.g. level and terrain) may partly explain the significant differences between the sexes recorded in cycling for off-road triathlon. Future studies will need to focus on the physiological bases of off-road triathlon and how they differ from conventional triathlon.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".