Can the heart rate response at the respiratory compensation point be used to retrieve the maximal metabolic steady state?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The metabolic rate (VO2) at the maximal metabolic steady state (MMSS) is generally not different from the VO2 at the respiratory compensation point (RCP). Based on this, it is often assumed that the heart rate (HR) at RCP would also be similar to that at MMSS. The study aims to compare the HR at RCP with that at MMSS. Seventeen individuals completed a ramp-incremental test, a series of severe-intensity trials to estimate critical power and two-to-three 30-min trials to confirm MMSS. The HR at RCP was retrieved by linear interpolation of the ramp-VO2/HR relationship and compared to the HR at MMSS recorded at 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 min. The HR at RCP was 166 ± 12 bpm. The HR during MMSS at the timepoints of interest was 168 ± 8, 171 ± 8, 175 ± 9, 177 ± 9 and 178 ± 10 bpm. The HR at RCP was not different from the HR at MMSS at 10 min (P > 0.05) but lower at subsequent timepoints (P < 0.05) with this difference becoming progressively larger. For all timepoints, limits of agreement were large (~30 bpm). Given these differences and the variability at the individual level, the HR at RCP cannot be used to control the metabolic stimulus of endurance exercise.
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 | 0.008 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".