Internal Tibial Forces and Moments During Graded Running
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stress experienced by the tibia has contributions from the forces and moments acting on the tibia. We sought to quantify the influence of running grade on internal tibial forces and moments. Seventeen participants ran at 3.33 m/s on an instrumented treadmill at 0 deg, ±5 deg, and ±10 deg while motion data were captured. Ankle joint contact force was estimated from an anthropometrically-scaled musculoskeletal model using inverse dynamics-based static optimization. Internal tibial forces and moments were quantified at the distal 1/3rd of the tibia, by ensuring static equilibrium with all applied forces and moments. Downhill running conditions resulted in lower peak internal axial force (range of mean differences: -9% to -16%, p < 0.001), lower peak internal anteroposterior force (-14% to -21%, p < 0.001), and lower peak internal mediolateral force (-14% to -15%, p < 0.001), compared to 0 deg and +5 deg. Furthermore, downhill conditions resulted in lower peak internal mediolateral moment (-11%to -21%, p < 0.001), lower peak internal anteroposterior moment (-13% to -14%, p < 0.001), and lower peak internal torsional moment (-9% to -21%, p < 0.001), compared to 0 deg, +5 deg, and +10 deg. The +10 deg condition resulted in lower peak internal axial force (-7% to -9%, p < 0.001) and lower peak internal mediolateral force (-9%, p = 0.004), compared to 0 deg and +5 deg. These findings suggest that downhill running may be associated with lower tibial stresses than either level or uphill running.
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".