Quantifying the familiarization period for maximal resistive exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resistive exercise is used in the assessment of musculoskeletal health, performance, training interventions, and population differences (i.e., gender, age, training status). There is a need to determine the amount of familiarization required to stabilize performance prior to testing. Fifteen males completed a familiarization session consisting of 3 blocks of 5 maximal isometric dorsiflexion contractions, followed by a retention test (an additional block of 5 contractions) performed 3 days later. Mean force and surface electromyography (sEMG) from both the agonist and antagonist muscles were collected. A variance ratio, representing the stability between trials, was calculated for each of the 4 blocks of 5 contractions for both force and sEMG. The variance ratio for both force and agonist sEMG decreased significantly within the first 10 trials and remained stable during the retention test. The variance ratio for antagonist sEMG was stable across the 3 blocks of familiarization and significantly decreased during the retention test. The magnitude variables all remained stable across the 3 familiarization blocks. However, an 11% increase in mean force was seen during the retention test while both agonist and antagonist sEMG remained stable. Although slight changes occurred in the magnitude variables during the retention test, the stabilization of the force and agonist sEMG variance ratios suggest that familiarization to the task was achieved within the first 10 contractions and was sustained over a 3-day period.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".