INFLUÊNCIA DA INTENSIDADE DE CORRIDA NA POTENCIALIZAÇÃO DO SALTO EM CORREDORES RECREACIONAIS E INDIVÍDUOS FISICAMENTE ATIVOS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) is an acute improvement in physical exercise performance after maximal or submaximal conditioning activity (CA). PAPE has been associated with trained individuals, and seems to be influenced by the individual conditioning level and CA intensity. However, the influence of CA intensity on PAPE in endurance events in individuals with different levels of physical conditioning is unclear. The aim of this study was to verify the effect of two runs, with different intensities on the PAPE, in individuals with different levels of physical conditioning. Eighteen men, divided into two groups: 9 recreational runners (34.5±9.3 years, 73.1±11.9 kg, 1.76±0.06 m, 17.4±4.4% fat; 16.4±1.0 Km.h-1/maximum aerobic speed-MAS), and 9 physically active individuals (34.1±9.4 years; 83.2±7.7 kg; 1.79±0.06 m; 25.6±5.4% fat; 13.3±1, 2 Km.h-1/MAS) performed two counter-movement jumps (CMJ) and two sprints pre and post-running intervention. Participants underwent a maximal incremental test (University Montreal Track Test – UMTT) to determine the MAS and distance to be completed in the interventions (70% of MAS and time trial race- TTR). The interaction of CMJ and SPRINT with time, intervention, and group was analysed trhough an ANOVA three-way. A significant difference in the time (F = 10.716; p < 0.01) and intervention*group interaction (F = 12.094; p < 0.01), with an increase in the height of the CMJ in 7.6% post-intervention at 70% of MAS for activie individuals and 6.9% post TTR for recreational runners, respectively. No significant difference was observed for SPRINTs. In conclusion, active individuals had higher PAPE in CMJ after intervention at 70% of MAS, while recreational runners presented PAPE after both interventions (70% of MAS and TTR), indicating that the greater intensity can influence the performance according to physical conditioning. Keywords: Races, Performance, Conditioning activity, Jumps.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".