The Reliability of 4-Minute and 20-Minute Time Trials and Their Relationships to Functional Threshold Power in Trained Cyclists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The mean power output (MPO) from a 60-min time trial (TT)-also known as functional threshold power, or FTP-is a standard measure of cycling performance; however, shorter performance tests are desirable to reduce the burden of performance testing. The authors sought to determine the reliability of 4- and 20-min TTs and the extent to which these short TTs were associated with 60-min MPO. METHODS: Trained male cyclists (n = 8; age = 25 [5] y; VO2max = 71 [5] mL/kg/min) performed two 4-min TTs, two 20-min TTs, and one 60-min TT. Critical power (CP) was estimated from 4- and 20-min TTs. The typical error of the mean (TEM) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated to assess reliability, and R2 values were calculated to assess relationships with 60-min MPO. RESULTS: Pairs of 4-min TTs (mean: 417 [SD: 45] W vs 412 [49] W, P = .25; TEM = 8.1 W; ICC = .98), 20-min TTs (342 [36] W vs 344 [33] W, P = .41; TEM = 4.6 W; ICC = .99), and CP estimates (323 [35] W vs 328 [32] W, P = .25; TEM = 6.5; ICC = .98) were reliable. The 4-min MPO (R2 = .95), 20-min MPO (R2 = .92), estimated CP (R2 = .82), and combination of the 4- and 20-min MPO (adjusted R2 = .98) were strongly associated with the 60-min MPO (309 [26] W). CONCLUSION: The 4- and 20-min TTs appear useful for assessing performance in trained, if not elite, 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 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 | 0.002 | 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".