Recent advances in understanding resistance exercise training-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy in humans
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skeletal muscle plays a pivotal role in the maintenance of physical and metabolic health and, critically, mobility. Accordingly, strategies focused on increasing the quality and quantity of skeletal muscle are relevant, and resistance exercise is foundational to the process of functional hypertrophy. Much of our current understanding of skeletal muscle hypertrophy can be attributed to the development and utilization of stable isotopically labeled tracers. We know that resistance exercise and sufficient protein intake act synergistically and provide the most effective stimuli to enhance skeletal muscle mass; however, the molecular intricacies that underpin the tremendous response variability to resistance exercise-induced hypertrophy are complex. The purpose of this review is to discuss recent studies with the aim of shedding light on key regulatory mechanisms that dictate hypertrophic gains in skeletal muscle mass. We also aim to provide a brief up-to-date summary of the recent advances in our understanding of skeletal muscle hypertrophy in response to resistance training in humans.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it