Comparison of muscle activity of the lower limbs while running on different treadmill models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treadmill running is a common method of exercise and to study human locomotion. Research has examined the kinematics and kinetics of overground and treadmill running, but there has been less focus on the levels of muscle activity during treadmill running. We investigated if muscle activity is different while running overground compared to running on a variety of treadmills. A total of 11 healthy individuals ran at 3 speeds (2.6, 3.6, 4.5 m/s) under 4 different running conditions (3 treadmills, overground). The three treadmills included a typical home exercise treadmill, a midsize commercial research treadmill, and a large, instrumented research treadmill. Surface EMG of the tibialis anterior (TA), gastrocnemius medialis (GM), rectus femoris (RF) and biceps femoris (BF) muscles were measured for each running condition. The integrated EMG was computed for each running condition for the stance and swing phase, as well as 100 ms before and after the heel-strike. Friedman analysis revealed significant effects during the stance phase for GM and RF at all speeds, such that muscle activation was lower on the treadmills relative to overground. During the stance phase at faster speeds, the muscle activity was higher for the TA and lower for the BF while running on the different treadmills compared to overground running. Before heel-strike, the TA was significantly less active during treadmill compared to overground running at 2.6 m/s and the RF showed significantly higher activity at 3.6 m/s and 4.5 m/s while running on the different treadmills. Summarizing, differences were mainly observed between the different treadmill conditions relative to overground running. Muscle activation differences between the different treadmill conditions were observed at faster running speeds for RF during the pre-heel-strike phase only. Different types of treadmills with different mechanical properties affects the muscle activity during stance phase as well as in preparation to heel-strike. Additionally, the muscle activity is greater during overground compared to treadmill running during the stance phase for the GM, BF, and RF.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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".