Experienced Cyclists Predict The Highest Sustainable Intensity Of Exercise More Effectively Than Critical Power Testing.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critical Power (CP) demarcates the boundary between sustainable and unsustainable exercise, and it is widely used as a measure of exercise tolerance/performance. Evaluation typically consists of a time-consuming and physically demanding protocol of 3-5 time-to-exhaustion trials (TTE) ranging from 1 to 20 min. However, the power output (PO) associated with the calculated CP does not always reflect a sustainable intensity of exercise, and lactate concentration ([La]) cannot be stabilized (i.e. lactate steady-state is not reached). PURPOSE: To test cyclists’ ability to predict their CP based on their own perception of effort, and to compare this PO with those derived from 5 TTE trials and maximal lactate steady-state (MLSS) measurements. METHODS: Seven experienced cyclists (28±3 yrs; 68.4±7.3 kg; 175±9 cm) participated in the study. A ramp incremental test to exhaustion was performed on a cycle ergometer (Velotron Dynafit Pro, Racer Mate, Seattle, WA, USA) for determination of VO2peak (Quark CPET, Cosmed, Rome, Italy) and peak PO (POpeak). PO of CP from 5 TTE trials was derived from a 2-parameter hyperbolic model (POHYP). Participants also performed two 30-min rides at a self-selected PO (POSELF) that they considered the highest intensity of exercise they could sustain for a prolonged time. Additionally, participants performed 30-min rides at the estimated POHYP for determination of PO at MLSS (POMLSS). [La] was measured at 5-min intervals and POMLSS was considered as the highest PO at which variation of [La] ≤ 1.0 mM·L-1 between the 10th and the 30th min. RESULTS: Mean VO2PEAK and POPEAK were 4.30±0.67 L·min-1 and 383±53 W, respectively. POHYP, POSELF and POMLSS were similar (267±39 W, 246±37 W and 246±37 W, respectively; p > 0.05). Bland-Altman plots were used to determine limits of agreement (LOA) between POSELF and POMLSS (-22 to 22 W, bias = 0; p > 0.05), POHYP and MLSS (-8 to 51 W, bias = 21; p > 0.05) and POSS and POHYP (-39 to -4 W, bias = -21 W; p > 0.05). Although POSELF and POHYP had similar magnitudes of range when compared to POMLSS, POHYP consistently over predicted POSELF and POMLSS. CONCLUSION: Experienced cyclists can predict their maximal sustainable PO for a prolonged time-trial with more precision than the current CP testing. This finding challenges the practical application of this test in experienced cyclists.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".