EXPLORE THE ARCHIVE

Zhang, X.

Publications and source records attributed to Zhang, X..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2026

Beyond Imbalance: An Elasticity Framework for the Distance-averaged Force-Velocity Relationship in Vertical Jump

This study aimed to (1) establish the distance-averaged F-V relationship framework and (2) develop elasticity metrics that quantify how F-V relationship variables govern jump height and inform training prescription. Theoretical derivation and experimental validation across 108 F-V relationship models derived from 1578 jumps (countermovement jump and squat jump at three knee angles; 20 well-trained subjects) yielded a standard error of 2.1% and a nearly perfect correlation (r = 0.96, p < 0.001) between measured and predicted jump height. Four elasticity metrics were formulated: force elasticity (F_{e}), the elasticity of jump height to maximal force (F_{0}); velocity elasticity (v_{e}), the elasticity of jump height to maximal velocity (v_{0}); the force-velocity elasticity norm {(\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{EN}}=\sqrt{F_{e}^{2}+v_{e}^{2}}), reflecting the overall sensitivity of jump height to changes in F-V relationship variables; and the force-velocity elasticity ratio {(\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{ER}}=F_{e}{\div v}_{e}), indicating which variable dominates the jump height response. Simulations and experiments revealed that F_{e} bore an inverse relationship to F_{0}, and v_{e} was inversely related to v_{0}, reflecting diminishing marginal returns. At a fixed jump height, simulations showed {\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{EN}} and {\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{ER}} displayed a U-shaped relationship; a balanced profile ({\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{ER}}=1) did not always correspond to the lowest {\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{EN}}. The distance-averaged F-V elasticity framework offers a physically grounded and quantitative tool for linking F-V relationship variables directly to jump performance, providing a basis for informing individualized training decisions.

biophysics↗

bioRxiv2026

From Prompt to Provenance: BloClaw, a Capability-Gated AI4S Workstation for Auditable Computational Biology

Scientific agents can produce plausible answers while remaining unable to establish whether the computation behind an answer is executable, recoverable, or reproducible. We present BloClaw, an AI4S workstation built around a simple principle: a scientific agent should know what it can do, show how it did it, and state what remains unvalidated. Each capability declares an execution state, input constraints, dependencies, expected outputs, and scientific limitations. Natural-language requests are translated into structured tasks, validated against this registry, executed through scientific tools, and recorded in a provenance-aware Living Lab Notebook. The system is designed to detect invalid inputs, failed tool calls, missing dependencies, and remote timeouts, and to route them to repair, retry, or escalation. The implemented and tested scope comprises RDKit-based molecular property and rule screening, protein structure analysis, docking-pose inspection, 3D visualization, and structured reporting. We demonstrate the workflow on a PubChem-retrieved osimertinib structure and a supplied 6LU7 docking artifact: the former yields deterministic descriptors (molecular weight 499.619 Da, cLogP 4.5098, TPSA 87.55 A^2), while the latter contains 2,387 protein ATOM records, 309 residues, and nine pose records. These examples are workflow demonstrations, not efficacy or affinity studies. Beyond retrospective prediction, the manuscript specifies a prior-minimized constructive mode in which a desired function is compiled into explicit physical, chemical, and systems constraints, candidate mechanisms are simulated, and observations are reintroduced for calibration and falsification; this is a proposed extension rather than a result of the present case studies. We describe an evaluation protocol that compares BloClaw with a standard single-agent workflow and fixed-script execution using task completion, scientific correctness, recovery success, provenance completeness, reproducibility, human review time, latency, and cost. This manuscript reports the system design, verified capability boundary, deterministic software artifacts, and a reproducible evaluation protocol; it does not claim benchmark improvements before those experiments are run. BloClaw is an execution and accountability layer for AI-assisted research, complementing expert review and experimental validation rather than replacing them.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2026

Quantifying sprint force-velocity elasticity: implications for individualized training decisions

This study aimed to (1) develop an elasticity framework for the sprint force-velocity (F-V) relationship and (2) examine how maximal force (F_{0}), maximal velocity (v_{0}), and sprint distance modulate the four derived elasticity metrics, and (3) explore these elasticity metrics' interrelation. After modelling the F-V relationship differential equation, four elasticity metrics were defined as force elasticity (F_{e}), the elasticity of sprint time to F_{0}; velocity elasticity (v_{e}), the elasticity of sprint time to v_{0}; the force-velocity elasticity norm {(\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{EN}}=\sqrt{F_{e}^{2}+v_{e}^{2}}), capturing the combined sprint time sensitivity to proportional changes in F_{0} and v_{0}; and the force-velocity elasticity ratio {(\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{ER}}=F_{e}{\div v}_{e}), indicating which variable dominates the sprint time response. Model simulations showed that F_{e} decreased with rising F_{0} and increased with rising v_{0}, while v_{e} showed the opposite pattern. With increasing sprint distance, F_{e} decreased and v_{e} increased. Given its negligible effect on sprint time, ignoring air resistance yields a conservation law (2F_{e}+v_{e}\equiv 1), indicating that a gain in one elasticity metric necessarily diminishes the other in a fixed proportion. This framework also identifies a valley distance (d_{valley}) at {\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{ER}}=2, where {\mathrm{F}-\mathrm{V}}_{\mathrm{EN}} is minimized (\sqrt{0.2}) and sprint time is least responsive to changes in F-V relationship variables. Empirical data confirmed that the two theoretical laws still hold approximately when air resistance is considered. By linking changes in F_{0} and v_{0} to sprint time across different distances, the elasticity framework provides a quantitative basis for estimating the theoretical sprint time response to documented changes in F-V relationship variables.

biophysics↗