The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 26 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Update and extension of the ‘Equivalent Slope’ of speed changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running
Open accessAbstract
Controlled experimental protocols for metabolic cost assessment of speed-changing locomotion are quite complex to design and manage. The use of the ‘equivalent slope’, i.e. the gradient locomotion at constant speed metabolically equivalent to a level progression in acceleration, has proved valuable in the estimation of the metabolic cost of speed-changing gaits. However, its use with steep slopes requires extrapolation of the experimental cost versus gradient function for constant running speed, resulting in less-reliable estimates. The present study extended the model to also work with deceleration, and revised the predictive equation to enable it to be applied to much higher levels of speed change. Shuttle running at different distances (from 5+5 to 20+20 m) was then investigated using the novel approach and software, and the predictions in terms of metabolic cost and efficiency compare well with the experimental data.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper updates and extends the “equivalent slope” model to include deceleration and higher speed changes, providing computational equations for the metabolic cost of accelerated and decelerated running. It applies the model to shuttle running from 5+5 to 20+20 m, where predicted metabolic cost and apparent efficiency compare well with experimental data.
Key findings
- New gradient-running cost equations were fitted: uphill \(C_{PG}=39.5i+3.6e^{-4i}\) and downhill \(C_{NG}=-8.34i+3.6e^{13i}\); in the range \(-0.45\le i\le +0.45\), the ratio of these to the previous Eqn 1 averaged 0.9993.
- The extended equivalent-slope model gives \(C_{AR}=0.102(a_f^2+96.2)^{0.5}(4.03a_f+3.6e^{-0.408a_f})\) for \(0<a_f<8.24\) m s\(^{-2}\), and \(C_{DR}=0.102(d_f^2+96.2)^{0.5}(-0.85d_f+3.6e^{1.33d_f})\) for \(-4.41<d_f<0\) m s\(^{-2}\), with suggested safe extension to \(-8.24<d_f<0\) m s\(^{-2}\).
- The shuttle-run model overestimated measured maximum speed by 4.96±1.64%; predicted average apparent efficiency of positive work was 35.3%, 29.9%, 23.2% and 17.5% for 20+20, 15+15, 10+10 and 5+5 m shuttles, respectively.
- Sprinting required about 1 J kg\(^{-1}\) m\(^{-1}\) more internal work than uphill running at the same equivalent slope/slope (0.925±0.069 J kg\(^{-1}\) m\(^{-1}\)), corresponding to \(C_{extraWint}=3.083\) J kg\(^{-1}\) m\(^{-1}\) at a muscle efficiency of 0.30.
Methods
- The mathematical model pooled prior gradient-running cost data (Minetti et al., 2002; Giovanelli et al., 2016) to fit new uphill and downhill cost equations, then combined equivalent slope and equivalent mass to derive equations for accelerated and decelerated running.
- The shuttle-running computational model assumed mono-exponential speed changes, \(v=v_{max}(1-e^{-t/\tau})\), with inputs from maximal 20+20 m shuttle-run kinematics: \(v_{max}=7.175\) m s\(^{-1}\), \(\tau_{af}=0.803\) s\(^{-1}\), \(\tau_{df}=0.472\) s\(^{-1}\) (CV 7.7–10.9%); an iterative process found the maximum speed and average metabolic cost for each shuttle distance.
- Predictions were compared with experimental shuttle-running metabolic cost from Buglione and di Prampero (2013) and Zamparo et al. (2015), with apparent efficiency compared with unpublished shuttle-run data and internal work compared between 20 m sprinting and uphill treadmill running.
Limitations
- The paper states that extrapolation of the earlier Eqn 8 at very high slopes is improved by Eqns 9 and 11, but the lower deceleration limit (\(-8.24\) m s\(^{-2}\)) is not close to human maximum; downhill metabolic data are lacking below \(i<-0.45\), and measurements should be extended to about \(-143\%\) slope.
- The paper states that approximations in the mathematical and computational model can affect predictions, including the asymptotic trend for steep downhill slopes and the assumption that short shuttle runs use truncated portions of long-run acceleration/deceleration, which generates a sharp speed peak slightly different from experimental patterns.
- The paper states that the model does not include all potential metabolic costs, such as isometric contractions and stabilizing co-contractions; turning cost is estimated but other components are not, and internal-work bias may arise because gradient running and sprint/shuttle running involve different stride frequencies and speeds. Evident from the text: predictions rely partly on unpublished shuttle-run kinematic data and comparisons to unpublished data, and no new experimental metabolic measurements were collected in this study.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
15 Own interpretation · 13 No full text of the sources · 12 No basis given · 5 Own result · 3 Not checked yet · 3 Own method · 2 Sources not found · 1 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The dynamics of speed change for acceleration and deceleration can be modelled according to a mono-exponential function (e.g.Furusawa et al., 1927;di Prampero et al., 2005):”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Furusawa et al., 1927 source
- Partly supportedcites di Prampero et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In Methods and calculations (page unavailable), the paper fits an exponential function to speed changes during the initial acceleration of a sprint. It discusses deceleration elsewhere, but does not show that deceleration speed changes follow a mono-exponential function. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“When pooling previous and recent results (Minetti et al., 2002;Giovanelli et al., 2016; see Fig. 1), the whole dataset confirms the trend of an oblique asymptote at very steep gradients.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The accuracy of the newly proposed equation(s) for C has been tested by computing the ratio, in the range -0.45≤i≤+0.45,between Eqns 4 and 3 with the negative and positive gradient branches of Eqn 1, respectively, resulting in an average value of 0.9993.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“C PG ¼ 39:5i þ 3:6e À4i ;ð3Þ”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“C NG ¼ À8:34i þ 3:6e 13i ;ð4Þ”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The comparison reveals about 1 J kg -1 m -1 of additional internal work (0.925±0.069J kg -1 m -1 ) that has to be added, in the form of its metabolic equivalent:”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When simulated acceleration/deceleration patterns from the measured average v max , τ af and τ df and their associated ES values were fed into the relationship between slope and efficiency shown in Fig. 3, the average apparent efficiency of positive work (by assuming a fixed eff-/eff+ ratio of 5) was found to be 35.3%,29.9%, 23.2% and 17.5% for 20+20, 15+15, 10+10 and 5+5 m shuttles, respectively.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Although the new equations for C (Eqns 3 and 4) very closely fit experimental data for gradient running (Minetti et al., 2002;Giovanelli et al., 2016), their asymptotic trend, particularly for steep downhill slopes, can be improved by investigating a wider gradient range (as mentioned) and the theoretically non-linear relationship between 'unavoidable' metabolic cost and gradient (see Appendix 2).”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Different from SRs, where Eqn 26 successfully predicted the cost of accelerations, Eqn 27 is a suggestion to be tested in future metabolic experiments on horses.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The inset graph in Fig. 2 reveals that the assumption ruling the simulation, i.e. that short-distance SRs use 'truncated' portions of acceleration and deceleration phases displayed at the maximum investigated distance, generates speed time courses with a sharp peak in between.This slightly differs from the experimental patterns (P.Zamparo, G.P., A. Monte, F. Nardello, T. Otsu, N. Numazu, N. Fujii”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Short-distance SRs use 'truncated' portions of acceleration and deceleration phases displayed at the maximum investigated distance.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 11
- Probably not a substantial claim. 9
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The present study extended the model to also work with deceleration, and revised the predictive equation to enable it to be applied to much higher levels of speed change.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the coefficients of which closely resemble the linear components of Eqns 3 and 4 where, in accordance with muscle physiology (Woledge et al., 1985), the absolute ratio between negative and positive efficiencies (and, consequently, between slopes of the linear parts of C curves) is close to 5 [from Eqns 3 and 4, abs(39.5/-8.34)=4.7].”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Woledge et al., 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, for shuttle running, Eqns 9 and 11 can take care of the metabolic equivalent of the accelerative and decelerative phases, respectively, but the energy required to rotate the body at speed inversion is not included in the prediction.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Shuttle running at different distances (from 5+ 5 to 20+20 m) was then investigated using the novel approach and software, and the predictions in terms of metabolic cost and efficiency compare well with the experimental data.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Abstract
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also, the metabolic energy of body turning at the end of SR legs is not included in the model based on Eqns 9 and 11.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the replacement of gradient i with ES in Eqn 1 is safely allowed only when -4.41<a f <+4.41 m s -2 .Beyond these limits, the extrapolation of C can be unsafe [reliability decreases with the (squared) distance from the limit].”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Eqns 9 and 11, alone or in combination, allow us to infer the metabolic cost of just accelerated running (as in sprints), in structured sequences of acceleration and deceleration bouts (shuttle running), and in sporting activities where complex combinations of accelerated and decelerated running irregularly occur (as in soccer, rugby, basketball, baseball, etc.).”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The internal mechanical work (W int , J kg -1 m -1 ), which accounts for the accelerations of body segments with respect to the body centre of mass (Cavagna and Kaneko, 1977), has been shown to be affected by many variables (Minetti, 1998):”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Cavagna and Kaneko, 1977 source
- Not matchedcites Minetti, 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Moving on slopes, particularly uphill running, is related to a much slower progression speed and a higher stride frequency (Minetti et al., 1994).”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Minetti et al., 1994 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the new equations for C (Eqns 3 and 4) very closely fit experimental data for gradient running (Minetti et al., 2002;Giovanelli et al., 2016), their asymptotic trend, particularly for steep downhill slopes, can be improved by investigating a wider gradient range (as mentioned) and the theoretically non-linear relationship between 'unavoidable' metabolic cost and gradient (see Appendix 2).”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other than shedding light on the metabolic effects of remarkable speed oscillation in a gait, where inherent velocity changes occur even at constant speed, the present revised methodology has potentially wide application in the monitoring of activity in daily life (submaximal speed changes) and exercise physiology, particularly in sport activities where unsteady locomotion is prevalent (submaximal”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Level running (at constant speed) is associated with an equal amount of positive and negative work of the body centre of mass (due to equal excursions of potential and kinetic increases and decreases).”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The metabolic cost of running along that circle was found to be almost speed independent, and equal to 283.1±64.1 ml O 2 kg -1 km -1 , or 5.78±1.31J kg -1 m -1 .”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Minetti et al., 2011 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The computational process starts from the (obvious) fact that the maximum speed reached at the end of the acceleration phase is the same as that at the start of the deceleration phase.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“When running on uphill (downhill) slopes, positive (negative) work becomes predominant, and beyond the slope range of ±0.35, gradient running shows a monotonic increase (decrease) of the body centre of mass [thus, just positive (negative) work is done], which impairs the chances of storing (releasing) elastic energy in (from) tendons (Minetti et al., 1994).”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Minetti et al., 1994 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Zamparo and colleagues (2014) showed that shuttles with full inversion (180 deg), when compared with other runs with just the straight (0 deg) stopand-go, resulted (non-significantly, though) in about +0.9 J kg -1 m -1 metabolic cost, in shuttle runs of 10 m (corresponding to about 9.0 J kg -1 turn -1 ).”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Zamparo et al., 2014 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proposed rule of thumb for the cost of accelerated running is a handy tool when literature data on the metabolic cost of constantspeed running at different gradients is not available, as in animal locomotion.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Approximations in the mathematical and computational model can affect overall predictions.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also, the time course of metabolic power (=instantaneous cost×instantaneous speed) can be calculated starting from one of the proposed computation frameworks (the 'rule of thumb' equations) to work out the maximum metabolic performance required in prey/predator settings.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The accelerative and decelerative phases of a maximal shuttle run of different section distances are portions of the same patterns exhibited when performing a very long shuttle run (20+20 m).
“The model is based on the assumption that the accelerative and decelerative phases of a maximal shuttle run (SR) of different section (leg) distances are portions of the same patterns exhibited when performing a very long SR (say 20+20 m).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The apparent efficiency of positive mechanical work as a function of slope is: 0 for downhill slopes steeper than -0.35; increasing up to 0.80 at i=0; decreasing down to 0.25 at +0.35; and constant 0.25 beyond +0.35.
“Therefore, with respect to the slope, the apparent efficiency of positive mechanical work is assumed to be: (a) 0 for downhill slopes steeper than -0.35,(b) an increasing value up to 0.80 at i=0 (in that range and in the next, different mixes of positive and negative work are performed), which is the maximum apparent efficiency of positive muscle work in level running at the maximum speed of SRs (”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The average apparent efficiency of positive work along one shuttle-run leg is the same for the other leg(s).
“From the calculated average value along one SR leg [eff mean , assumed to be the same for the other leg(s)], we could infer how much mechanical energy saving via the elastic mechanism has occurred (zero for eff mean ≈0.25 and the maximum possible when approaching 0.75-0.80).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Short-distance SRs use 'truncated' portions of acceleration and deceleration phases displayed at the maximum investigated distance.
“the assumption ruling the simulation, i.e. that short-distance SRs use 'truncated' portions of acceleration and deceleration phases displayed at the maximum investigated distance”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > APPENDIX 2 Note about the statistical model equation
“(-16% at i=+0.80) from Eqn 4.”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
“where C NG is the cost of negative gradient (running).”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > RESULTS
“τ af =0.803 s -1 and τ df =0.472 s -1”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
“where v max is the asymptotic, maximum speed (m s -1 ), and τ is the time constant (s).”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > MATERIALS AND METHODS Mathematical model
“C AR ¼ ð55:4ES 5 À 30:4ES 4 À 43:3ES 3 þ 46:3ES 2 þ 19:5ES þ 3:6ÞEM:ð8Þ”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > INTRODUCTION
“C ¼ 155:4i 5 À 30:4i 4 À 43:3i 3 þ 46:3i 2 þ 19:5i þ 3:6; ð1Þ”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > RESULTS
“τ df =0.472 s -1”
§ Update and extension of the 'equivalent slope' of speed-changing level locomotion in humans: a computational model for shuttle running > Computational model of shuttle running
“Eqn 13 is valid for SR acceleration phases when t≥0, τ af >0, and for SR deceleration phases when t≤0, τ df <0.”
Citations
Cites
Energetic aspects of muscle contraction
WOLEDGE, R. C. (1986) · General Pharmacology The Vascular System · doi:10.1016/0306-3623(86)90238-7 · Cited by 753
Mechanical work and efficiency in level walking and running
Cavagna, G. A., & Kaneko, M. (1977) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1977.sp011866 · Cited by 664
Energy cost of walking and running at extreme uphill and downhill slopes
Minetti, A. E., Moia, C., Roi, G. S., Susta, D., & Ferretti, G. (2002) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.01177.2001 · Cited by 624
Self-citationEnergy cost and metabolic power in elite soccer: a new match analysis approach
OSGNACH, C., POSER, S., BERNARDINI, R., RINALDO, R., & DI PRAMPERO, P. E. (2010) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e3181ae5cfd · Cited by 597
Sprint running: a new energetic approach
di Prampero, P. E., Fusi, S., Sepulcri, L., Morin, J. B., Belli, A., & Antonutto, G. (2005) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.01700 · Cited by 319
The relationship between mechanical work and energy expenditure of locomotion in horses
Minetti, A. E., Ardigò, L. P., Reinach, E., & Saibene, F. (1999) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.202.17.2329 · Cited by 224
Self-citationGaudino, P., Alberti, G., & Iaia, F. M. (2014) · Human Movement Science · doi:10.1016/j.humov.2014.05.006 · Cited by 203
Biomechanics of predator–prey arms race in lion, zebra, cheetah and impala
Wilson, A. M., Hubel, T. Y., Wilshin, S. D., Lowe, J. C., Lorenc, M., Dewhirst, O. P., Bartlam‐Brooks, H. L. A., Diack, R., Bennitt, E., Golabek, K. A., et al. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature25479 · Cited by 201
Mechanical determinants of the minimum energy cost of gradient running in humans
Minetti, A. E., Ardigò, L. P., & Saibene, F. (1994) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.195.1.211 · Cited by 173
Self-citationGaudino, P., Iaia, F., Alberti, G., Strudwick, A., Atkinson, G., & Gregson, W. (2013) · International Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-0033-1337943 · Cited by 144
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Margaria, 1938, Sulla fisiologia e specialmente sul consumo energetico della marcia e della corsa a varia velocità ed inclinazione del terreno, Atti Acc. Naz. Lincei, 6, 299
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Riboli, A., Coratella, G., Rampichini, S., Cè, E., & Esposito, F. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0229194 · Cited by 105
Peyré‐Tartaruga, L. A., & Coertjens, M. (2018) · Frontiers in Physiology · doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.01789 · Cited by 73
Peyré‐Tartaruga, L. A., Dewolf, A. H., di Prampero, P. E., Fábrica, G., Malatesta, D., Minetti, A. E., Monte, A., Pavei, G., Silva‐Pereyra, V., Willems, P. A., et al. (2021) · Experimental Physiology · doi:10.1113/ep089313 · Cited by 69
Self-citationMetabolic Power: A Step in the Right Direction for Team Sports
Polglaze, T., & Hoppe, M. (2019) · International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance · doi:10.1123/ijspp.2018-0661 · Cited by 53
Machekano, H., Mutamiswa, R., Singano, C. D., Joseph, V., Chidawanyika, F., & Nyamukondiwa, C. (2020) · Journal of Stored Products Research · doi:10.1016/j.jspr.2020.101568 · Cited by 33
Comprehensive mechanical power analysis in sprint running acceleration
Pavei, G., Zamparo, P., Fujii, N., Otsu, T., Numazu, N., Minetti, A. E., & Monte, A. (2019) · Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports · doi:10.1111/sms.13520 · Cited by 35
Self-citationAnalysis of Motion Characteristics and Metabolic Power in Elite Male Handball Players
Bassek, M., Raabe, D., Memmert, D., & Rein, R. (2023) · Journal of Sports Science and Medicine · doi:10.52082/jssm.2023.310 · Cited by 20
Mechanical and Metabolic Power in Accelerated Running–PART I: the 100-m dash
di Prampero, P. E., Osgnach, C., Morin, J.-B., Zamparo, P., & Pavei, G. (2023) · European Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1007/s00421-023-05236-x · Cited by 20
Self-citationSavoia, C., Padulo, J., COLLI, R., Marra, E., McRobert, A. P., Chester, N. J., Azzone, V., Pullinger, S. A., & Doran, D. A. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17249554 · Cited by 18
Rasica, L., Porcelli, S., Minetti, A. E., & Pavei, G. (2020) · European Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1007/s00421-020-04474-7 · Cited by 17
Self-citationAnalysis of contextualized intensity in Men’s elite handball using graph-based deep learning
Bassek, M., Raabe, D., Banning, A., Memmert, D., & Rein, R. (2023) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640414.2023.2268366 · Cited by 13
Validity and reliability of a standalone low-end 50-Hz GNSS receiver during running
Padulo, J., Iuliano, E., Brisola, G. M. P., Iacono, A. D., Zagatto, A. M., Lupo, C., Fuglsang, T., Ardigò, L. P., & Čular, D. (2018) · Biology of Sport · doi:10.5114/biolsport.2019.79974 · Cited by 12
Quantifying metabolic energy contributions in sprint running: a novel bioenergetic model
Briand, J., di Prampero, P. E., Osgnach, C., Thibault, G., & Tremblay, J. (2025) · European Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1007/s00421-025-05831-0 · Cited by 11
Energetics (and Mechanical Determinants) of Sprint and Shuttle Running
Zamparo, P., Monte, A., & Pavei, G. (2023) · International Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1055/a-2184-9007 · Cited by 8
Self-citationBiomechanics of lateral movements
Parada, L. A., Bona, R. L., & Biancardi, C. M. (2024) · Scientific Journal of Sport and Performance · doi:10.55860/xexk5613 · Cited by 7
Human locomotion: models and biomechanical variables
Biancardi, C. M., Bona, R. L., & Lagos-Hausheer, L. (2020) · Pensar en Movimiento Revista de Ciencias del Ejercicio y la Salud · doi:10.15517/pensarmov.v18i2.41360 · Cited by 6
Modeling Locomotion with Body Angular Movements in Virtual Reality
Mai, Z., Gao, B., Tu, H., Li, D. N., Kim, H. S., & Luo, W. (2025) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713864 · Cited by 5
Grassadonia, G., Alcaráz, P. E., & Freitas, T. T. (2024) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s24082577 · Cited by 6
Minetti, A. E., Rapuzzi, F., Alberton, C. L., & Pavei, G. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.218982 · Cited by 5
Self-citationMancini, A., Vitucci, D., Meo, P., Capobianco, A., Martone, D., Cozzolino, F., Buono, P., Imperlini, E., & Orrù, S. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18189833 · Cited by 2
Shahid, S. S., Kerskens, C., Burrows, M., & Witney, A. G. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-82187-3 · Cited by 2
Energy Cost of Badminton Footwork: A Novel Experimental Approach
Pugliese, L., Pavei, G., Torre, A. L., Gianfelici, A., Rampichini, S., & Esposito, F. (2025) · International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance · doi:10.1123/ijspp.2024-0267 · Cited by 1
Self-citationEnergy cost of running uphill as compared to running on the level with impeding horizontal forces
Osgnach, C., Koren, K., Šimunič, B., Ušaj, A., & di Prampero, P. E. (2024) · European Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1007/s00421-024-05587-z · Cited by 1
Energetics, kinematics, and physiologic aspects of tango walking in the leader role
Torres, C., Minetti, A. E., Biancardi, C. M., & Fábrica, G. (2026) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.21581
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Minetti, A. E., & Pavei, G.
- Affiliations
- University of Milan (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Minetti, Alberto E.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Biology
- Publisher
- The Company of Biologists
- Published
- 2018-01-01
- Volume
- 221
- Issue
- Pt 15
- ISSN
- 0022-0949 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9145
- OpenAlex
- W2808359881
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 3.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Keywords
- shuttle run, metabolic cost, energy expenditure, computational model, deceleration, acceleration, running efficiency, human locomotion
- MeSH terms
- Acceleration, Energy Metabolism, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Running
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
