The effect of regional quadriceps anatomical parameters on angle-specific isometric torque expression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The length–tension relationship affects knee extension performance; however, whether anatomical variations in different quadriceps regions affect this relationship is unknown. Regional (proximal, middle, distal) quadriceps thickness (MT), pennation angle, and fascicle length of 24 males (48 limbs) were assessed via ultrasonography. Participants also performed maximal voluntary isometric torque (MVIT) assessments at 40°, 70°, and 100° of knee flexion. Measures were recorded on 3 separate occasions. Linear regression models predicting angle-specific torque from regional anatomy provided adjusted simple and multiple correlations (√adjR 2 ) with bootstrapped compatibility limits to assess magnitude. Middle vastus lateralis MT and MVIT at 100° (√adjR 2 = 0.64) was the largest single correlation, with distal vastus lateralis MT having the greatest mean correlations regardless of angle (√adjR 2 = 0.61 ± 0.05, mean ± SD). Lateral distal MT and architecture had larger (Δ√adjR 2 = 0.01 to 0.43) single and multiple correlations with MVIT than the lateral proximal (√adjR 2 = 0.15 to 0.69 vs −0.08 to 0.65). Conversely, middle anterior MT had greater (Δ√adjR 2 = 0.08 to 0.38) single and multiple correlations than proximal MT (√adjR 2 = 0.09 to 0.49 vs −0.21 to 0.14). The length–tension relationship was trivially affected by regional quadriceps architecture. The middle and distal quadriceps were the strongest predictors of MVIT at all joint angles. Therefore, researchers may wish to focus on middle and distal lateral quadriceps anatomy when performing ultrasonographic evaluations. Novelty: The length–tension relationship is minimally affected by regional quadriceps anatomical parameters. Middle and distal vastus lateralis and lateral vastus intermedius anatomy were consistently the best predictors of torque. Practitioners may focus their assessments on the middle and distal regions of the lateral quadriceps’ musculature.
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 | 0.000 | 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".