Bibliographic record
Abstract
This brief monograph is based upon a workshop hosted by the Nestlé Nutrition Institute in December of 2011.The opening premise was that while athletes and their coaches spend much time on selecting diets for the day of competition, they might obtain greater dividends in terms of ultimate performance if they were to focus on modulations of diet that facilitated training in the preceding months.Leading sports nutritionists offer 12 short contributions on this theme.Each paper is accompanied by about 30 recent references and there is a brief transcript of the ensuing discussion.John Hawley argues that there are several advantages to training when the glycogen content of the muscles is low.In particular, the muscles develop a greater ability to oxidize fats, and there is probably also an upregulation of the key enzymes involved in mitochondrial biogenesis.Interestingly, and in apparent conflict with some recent investigations, Hawley maintains that there is no advantage from ingesting proteins prior to a bout of exercise.Louise Burke covers the more familiar territory of bicarbonate loading and sports performance, but she concludes her chapter with a tantalizingly brief allusion to the use of bicarbonates as a means of reducing muscle damage and allowing more intensive training.Andrew Jones and colleagues discuss the potential to increase muscular efficiency by ingesting nitrates (in doses of 0.1 mmol/kg), perhaps via effects on calcium handling in the sarcoplasmic reticulum or on the actin-myosin interaction.Caution is urged, because some reports have suggested that nitrites can be carcinogenic.Martin Gibala, from McMaster University, is assigned the topic of high-intensity interval training for team sports.He suggests that such training might be facilitated by the administration of substances such as sodium bicarbonate, creatine, or caffeine that enhance the acute response to exercise, but he admits that there is as yet little hard evidence of benefit from the adoption of such practices on a regular basis.Kevin Tipton examines possible dietary tactics to reduce loss of muscle tissue during recovery from injury.He points to evidence that supports the administration of leucine (to counter the "anabolic resistance" of an injured limb) and omega-3 fatty acids
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.365 | 0.295 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".