MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164751875 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.639377

Breath-Hold Diving – The Physiology of Diving Deep and Returning

2021· review· en· W3164751875 on OpenAlex
Alexander Patrician, Željko Dujić, Boris Spajić, Ivan Drviš, Philip N. Ainslie

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecompression sicknessDecompressionAsphyxiaMedicineHydrostatic pressureDecompression illnessPhysiological AdaptationsPhysiologyBiologyAnesthesiaEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breath-hold diving involves highly integrative physiology and extreme responses to both exercise and asphyxia during progressive elevations in hydrostatic pressure. With astonishing depth records exceeding 100 m, and up to 214 m on a single breath, the human capacity for deep breath-hold diving continues to refute expectations. The physiological challenges and responses occurring during a deep dive highlight the coordinated interplay of oxygen conservation, exercise economy, and hyperbaric management. In this review, the physiology of deep diving is portrayed as it occurs across the phases of a dive: the first 20 m; passive descent; maximal depth; ascent; last 10 m, and surfacing. The acute risks of diving (i.e., pulmonary barotrauma, nitrogen narcosis, and decompression sickness) and the potential long-term medical consequences to breath-hold diving are summarized, and an emphasis on future areas of research of this unique field of physiological adaptation are provided.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it