Relationship between biomechanics and energy cost in graded treadmill running
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objective of this study was to determine whether the relationships between energy cost of running (Cr) and running mechanics during downhill (DR), level (LR) and uphill (UR) running could be related to fitness level. Nineteen athletes performed four experimental tests on an instrumented treadmill: one maximal incremental test in LR, and three randomized running bouts at constant speed (10 km h −1 ) in LR, UR and DR (± 10% slope). Gas exchange, heart rate and ground reaction forces were collected during steady-state. Subjects were split into two groups using the median Cr for all participants. Contact time, duty factor, and positive external work correlated with Cr during UR (all, p < 0.05), while none of the mechanical variables correlated with Cr during LR and DR. Mechanical differences between the two groups were observed in UR only: contact time and step length were higher in the economical than in the non-economical group (both p < 0.031). This study shows that longer stance duration during UR contributes to lower energy expenditure and Cr (i.e., running economy improvement), which opens the way to optimize specific running training programs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".