Differences in Size, Strength, and Power of Upper and Lower Body Muscle Groups in Young and Older Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared muscle thickness, torque, normalized torque (torque/muscle thickness), and power at 1.05 rad/s and 3.14 rad/s in flexor and extensor muscles of the elbow and knee, and in ankle plantar flexors in young (n=22, 18-31 years) and older (n=28, 59-76 years) men. Young men had greater muscle thickness for all muscle groups (p<.01), except elbow extensors, which were similar to older men. Young men had greater torque and power at both velocities for all muscle groups (p<.01), and greater normalized torque at both velocities for the elbow extensors and knee flexors and at the fast velocity for knee extensors. Relative to young mean values, muscle thickness, and torque, normalized torque, and power in the older group were most affected for lower-body measurements, especially at the fast velocity. Torque, normalized torque, and power (especially at fast velocities), and muscle thickness in the lower body are affected more by aging than are upper body measures in men.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".