Researcher profile

Jason Siegler

Jason Siegler contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A hydraulic model outperforms work-balance models for predicting recovery kinetics from intermittent exercise

Data Science advances in sports commonly involve "big data", i.e., large sport-related data sets. However, such big data sets are not always available, necessitating specialized models that apply to relatively few observations. One important area of sport-science research that features small data sets is the study of recovery from exercise. In this area, models are typically fitted to data collected from exhaustive exercise test protocols, which athletes can perform only a few times. Recent findings highlight that established recovery such as the so-called work-balance models are too simple to adequately fit observed trends in the data. Therefore, we investigated a hydraulic model that requires the same few data points as work-balance models to be applied, but promises to predict recovery dynamics more accurately. To compare the hydraulic model to established work-balance models, we retrospectively applied them to data compiled from published studies. In total, one hydraulic model and three work-balance models were compared on data extracted from five studies. The hydraulic model outperformed established work-balance models on all defined metrics, even those that penalize models featuring higher numbers of parameters. These results incentivize further investigation of the hydraulic model as a new alternative to established performance models of energy recovery.

preprint2022arXiv

Benefits and limitations of a new hydraulic performance model

Purpose: Performance models are important tools for coaches and athletes to optimise competition outcomes or training schedules. A recently published hydraulic performance model has been reported to outperform established work-balance models in predicting recovery during intermittent exercise. The new hydraulic model was optimised to predict exercise recovery dynamics. In this work, we hypothesised that the benefits of the model come at the cost of inaccurate predictions of metabolic responses to exercise such as $\dot{V}_{\mathrm{O}_2}$. Methods: Hydraulic model predictions were compared to breath-by-breath $\dot{V}_{\mathrm{O}_2}$ data from 25 constant high-intensity exercise tests of 5 participants (age $32\pm7.8$ years, weight $73.6 \pm 5.81$ kg, $\dot{V}_{\mathrm{O}_2\mathrm{max}} \; 3.59 \pm 0.62$ L/min). Each test was performed to volitional exhaustion on a cycle ergometer with a duration between 2 and 12 min. The comparison focuses on the onset of $\dot{V}_{\mathrm{O}_2}$ kinetics. Results: On average, the hydraulic model predicted peak $\dot{V}_{\mathrm{O}_2}$ during exercise $216\pm113$~s earlier than observed in the data. The new hydraulic model also did not predict the so-called $\dot{V}_{\mathrm{O}_2}$ slow component and made the unrealistic assumption that there is no $\dot{V}_{\mathrm{O}_2}$ at the onset of exercise. Conclusion: While the new hydraulic model may be a powerful tool for predicting energy recovery, it should not be used to predict metabolic responses during high-intensity exercise. The present study contributes towards a more holistic picture of the benefits and limitations of the new hydraulic model. Data and code are published as open source.