Open-ended time durations for stationary start intense cycle ergometer exercise testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study involved application of different applied loads to measure altered test durations, time to peak power, peak power, and peak cadence during intense cycle ergometry exercise. Healthy, physically active male (n = 11) and female (n = 11) subjects (18-45 years) performed the following 3 bouts of intense cycle ergometry at peak cadence to volitional exhaustion on 3 separate days, 48 h to 1 week apart: (i) 85 g·kg(-1) body mass load; (ii) 75 g·kg(-1) body mass load; and (iii) 100 g·kg(-1) body mass load. Trials (ii) and (iii) were performed in random order after trial (i). Exercise consisted of a stationary start, where test termination occurred when cadence decreased to <35 r·min(-1). Mean (±SD) for gender main effects for time to peak power were 7.64 ± 2.76 vs. 9.49 ± 2.76 s (p < 0.001) for males and females, respectively. Relative peak power data for males vs. females for 75, 85, and 100 g·kg(-1) were 10.01 ± 1.371 vs. 7.81 ± 1.25, 10.16 ± 1.61 vs. 7.67 ± 1.35, and 10.91 ± 2.03 vs. 7.31 ± 1.37 W·kg(-1), respectively. The means for test duration for the GENDER × LOAD interaction (p = 0.09) were 68.25 ± 17.80 vs. 56.5 ± 11.56, 63.70 ± 17.21 vs.57.95 ± 10.45, and 51.99 ± 14.59 vs. 49.54 ± 12.45 s for males vs. females for each of 75, 85, and 100 g·kg(-1), respectively. Stepwise multiple regression involving load and gender resulted in an explanation of variance (R(2)) of only 31.2%. Open-ended testing should be performed at a load of 100 g·kg(-1) body mass for males and 85 g·kg(-1) body mass females, causing volitional exhaustion in approximately 60 s and should allow test duration to be another measured variable.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".