Custom Smartphone Application to Guide Locomotor-Respiratory Coupling in the Field Using Step-Adaptive Breathing Sounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While running is amongst the most popular activities for competition and leisure, an estimated 20-40% of runners may suffer from respiratory limitations. Some of these runners may benefit from breathing techniques to improve performance or alleviate respiratory discomfort. One such technique is locomotor-respiratory coupling (LRC), a frequency and phase synchronization of breath to step. Studies have demonstrated that LRC may benefit ventilatory efficiency via "step-driven flows," and some experts have argued it could be used for pacing exercise or increasing positive emotional states. Nevertheless, it may be difficult to perform without coaching or guidance. Here we propose RunRhythm, a custom smartphone application to deliver step-synchronized sound guidance for LRC. This concept builds on previous evidence that sound guidance can be effective and integrates features to maximize adherence and individualization. Preliminary results show that this application is a promising and efficacious method suitable for research on LRC in field exercise. Recommendations for use and further development are discussed to further develop this concept for the benefit of a wider population.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
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".