On minimizing cyclists’ ascent times: Part II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We formulate an optimization of a bicycle ascent time under the constraints of the average, maximum, and minimum powers. In contrast to the first part of this study, we do not restrict the departure to flying starts with an initial speed determined by the model and its optimization. We allow for various initial speeds, from a standstill to a launched start. We accomplish this by generalizing the discontinuous piecewise constant speed model to a continuous piecewise linear speed model. Regardless of the initial speed, steepness, or profile of the ascent, the optimal strategy tends to a constant ground speed, in agreement with the conclusion of the previous, more restricted, formulation. This new formulation allows us to compare various initial-speed strategies and, hence, has a direct application to competitive cycling. Notably, in timetrials composed of flat and steep sections, it helps one decide whether or not to change the bicycle, which requires stopping and restarting, from one that is more appropriate for flats to one that is more appropriate for uphills.
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".