Effects of skin and mild core cooling on cognitive function in cold air in men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study tested the effects of skin and core cooling on cognitive function in 0°C cold air. Ten males completed a randomized, repeated measures study consisting of four environmental conditions: (i) 30 min of exposure to 22°C thermoneutral air (TN), (ii) 15 min to 0°C cold air which cooled skin temperature to ~27°C (CS), (iii) 0°C cold air exposure causing mild core cooling of ∆-0.3°C from baseline (C-0.3°C) and (iv) 0°C cold air exposure causing mild core cooling of ∆-0.8°C from baseline (C-0.8°C). Cognitive function (reaction time [ms] and errors made [#]) were tested using a simple reaction test, a two-six item working memory capacity task, and vertical flanker task to assess executive function. There were no condition effects (all p > 0.05) for number of errors made on any task. There were no significant differences in reaction time relative to TN for the vertical flanker and item working memory capacity task. However, simple reaction time was slower in C-0.3°C (297 ± 33 ms) and C-0.8°C (296 ± 41 ms) compared to CS (267 ± 26 ms) but not TN (274 ± 38). Despite small changes in simple reaction time (~30 ms), executive function and working memory was maintained in 0°C cold air with up to ∆-0.8°C reduction in core temperature.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".