COMPARAÇÃO DA VELOCIDADE DE CORRIDA NO VO2MÁX (vVO2Máx) E DA FREQUÊNCIA CARDÍACA MÁXIMA (FCMáx) EM CORREDORES AMADORES NOS PROTOCOLOS INDIRETOS DE 1 KM, 1 MILHA, 12 MINUTOS DE COOPER E O TESTE PROGRESSIVO DA UNIVERSIDADE DE MONTREAL (TPUM)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NUNES, W.A.A. e PEREIRA, J. Comparação da velocidade de corrida no VO2max (vVO2max) e da frequência cardíaca máxima (FCMax) em corredores amadores nos protocolos indiretos de 1 km, 1 milha, 12 minutos’ de Cooper e o Teste Progressivo da Universidade de Montreal (TPUM). Revista Científica JOPEF, Vol.28, n.1, pp.16-28, 2019. The current study, the course conclusion working main objective was to make the comparison of the estimation of vVO2máx (Running Speed at VO²max) and HRMax (Maximum Heart Rate) found by the following indirect VO2máx evaluation protocols: 1Km Test, 1 Mile Test, Cooper's 12 minutes Test, 'Test and the University of Montreal Progressive Test (TPUM) on a 1% incline treadmill, also known as the Maximum Aerobic Speed (VAM) Test. Forty-four male military runners, volunteers, with a mean age of 19.5 ± 0.79 with a mean BMI 23.11 ± 0.9 who attended CFC/18 (Military Cable Training Course/ 2018) participated in the study. Cooper's 12 minutes Test was held at the Federal University of Paraná (UFPR) athletics track in Curitiba-PR, where its result counted towards the final grade and classification in the referred course. The 1 Km test and the 1 Mile test were collected during the 12 minutes Cooper Test at UFPR and the University of Montreal Progressive Test on a 1% incline electric treadmill was performed 48h after the 12 minutes Cooper Test in a controlled environment using a Moviment RT250 G2 professional treadmill with a top speed of 18km/h. The research was characterized by a deductive approach study that uses a comparative technical procedure of an applied nature that was analyzed in its quantitative and qualitative descriptive form with data obtained through practical field tests where the comparison of vVO2máx and HRMax occurred. The mean values obtained and the standard deviation were obtained. To analyze the differences between vVO2máx and HRMax, the Student's t-test was used (significance level adopted was p <0.05). The results showed that there was no significant difference between vVO2máx found in the 1 Km, 1 Milha, 12 minutes Cooper and TPUM. In the HRMax study there was a significant difference between the 1 km test and Cooper's 12 minutes and 1 Km test and the TPUM. No significant differences were found between the 1 km and 1 mile, 1 mile and Cooper, 1 mile and TPUM and Cooper and TPUM tests. The highest values of HRMax were found in the 12 'tests of Cooper and TPUM, in some cases the results found in the latter underestimate all current equations that are used to obtain the estimate of HRMax.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".