The role of cognition as a factor regulating the diving responses of animals, including humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dive response involves three main components - breath holding, reduced heart rate and increased peripheral vasoconstriction - and is ubiquitous during forced dives in air-breathing vertebrates; however, numerous studies in free-diving animals have shown that the heart rate response to diving varies considerably in a manner that suggests cognitive control. Furthermore, studies on free-diving animals and controlled experiments in trained animals both indicate that the dive response can be conditioned, such that the reduction in heart rate begins before submergence and the extent of the reduction is set early in the dive. In addition, numerous species also experience an increase in heart rate and blood flow during ascent at the end of a dive, a phenomenon commonly called 'ascent tachycardia'. Collectively, these data suggest that although the dive response is under autonomic control, many species can vary its magnitude depending on the length and type of the planned dive - an indication of a role for cognition in the overall physiological responses associated with diving. Here, we provide examples of the conditioned cardiac responses - including anticipatory changes in heart rate - in several diving species and propose potential underlying mechanisms. We also discuss how the anticipatory cardiovascular responses not only improve diving capacity, but also prevent diving-related problems, such as decompression sickness or barotrauma, through a mechanism described by the selective gas exchange hypothesis.
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) | 0.001 | 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".