No evidence for metabolic adaptation during exercise-related energy compensation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The constrained energy model posits that the increased total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) in response to exercise is often less than the energy cost of the exercise prescribed. The mechanisms behind this phenomenon, coined "exercise-related energy compensation" (ExEC), are poorly understood, and it is unknown if ExEC is coupled with metabolic adaptation. Using a randomized controlled 24-week exercise intervention, individuals who demonstrated ExEC were identified. Changes to all components of TDEE and metabolic adaptation were assessed using doubly labeled water over 14 days and room calorimetry over 24-h 48% of individuals exhibited ExEC (−308 ± 158 kcals/day). There were no statistically significant differences in sex, age, or BMI between ExEC and non-ExEC. ExEC was associated with baseline TDEE (r = −0.50, p = 0.006). There were no statistically significant differences in metabolic adaptations for 24 h, sleep, or resting expenditures. These findings reveal that ExEC occurs independent of metabolic adaptation in sedentary components of EE.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".