No abstract

PurposeThe aim of the current study is to describe the functionality of free software developed for energy system contributions and energy expenditure calculation during exercise, namely GEDAE-LaB.MethodsEleven participants performed the following tests: 1) a maximal cycling incremental test to measure the ventilatory threshold and maximal oxygen uptake (O2max); 2) a cycling workload constant test at moderate domain (90% ventilatory threshold); 3) a cycling workload constant test at severe domain (110% O2max). Oxygen uptake and plasma lactate were measured during the tests. The contributions of the aerobic (AMET), anaerobic lactic (LAMET), and anaerobic alactic (ALMET) systems were calculated based on the oxygen uptake during exercise, the oxygen energy equivalents provided by lactate accumulation, and the fast component of excess post-exercise oxygen consumption, respectively. In order to assess the intra-investigator variation, four different investigators performed the analyses independently using GEDAE-LaB. A direct comparison with commercial software was also provided.ResultsAll subjects completed 10 min of exercise at moderate domain, while the time to exhaustion at severe domain was 144 ± 65 s. The AMET, LAMET, and ALMET contributions during moderate domain were about 93, 2, and 5%, respectively. The AMET, LAMET, and ALMET contributions during severe domain were about 66, 21, and 13%, respectively. No statistical differences were found between the energy system contributions and energy expenditure obtained by GEDAE-LaB and commercial software for both moderate and severe domains (P > 0.05). The ICC revealed that these estimates were highly reliable among the four investigators for both moderate and severe domains (all ICC ≥ 0.94).ConclusionThese findings suggest that GEDAE-LaB is a free software easily comprehended by users minimally familiarized with adopted procedures for calculations of energetic profile using oxygen uptake and lactate accumulation during exercise. By providing availability of the software and its source code we hope to facilitate future related research.

No abstract

Recent studies have proposed the use of experiments to guide software development in order to build features that the user really wants. Some authors argue that this approach represents a new way to develop software that is different from the traditional requirement-driven one. In this position paper, we propose the discipline of Hypotheses Engineering in comparison to Requirements Engineering, highlighting the importance of proper handling hypotheses that guide experiments. We derive a set of practices within this discipline and present how the literature has tackled them up to now. Finally, we propose a set of research questions that could guide future work towards helping practitioners.

No abstract