Pupillometry Reveals the Role of Arousal in a Postexercise Benefit to Executive Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A single bout of aerobic exercise improves executive function; however, the mechanism(s) underlying this improvement remains unclear. Here, we employed a 20-min bout of aerobic exercise, and at pre- and immediate post-exercise sessions examined executive function via pro- (i.e., saccade to veridical target location) and anti-saccade (i.e., saccade mirror symmetrical to a target) performance and pupillometry metrics. Notably, tonic and phasic pupillometry responses in oculomotor control provided a framework to determine the degree that arousal and/or executive resource recruitment influence behavior. Results demonstrated a pre- to post-exercise decrease in pro- and anti-saccade reaction times (p = 0.01) concurrent with a decrease and increase in tonic baseline pupil size and task-evoked pupil dilations, respectively (ps < 0.03). Such results demonstrate that an exercise-induced improvement in saccade performance is related to an executive-mediated “shift” in physiological and/or psychological arousal, supported by the locus coeruleus norepinephrine system to optimize task engagement.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".