Homoeostasis Performance Model

Wow, I told myself last week that I would sit down and read all this when I have time. Well, I just finished and it’s very good. I’ll have to re-read it of course, and sift through it, but it does seem very logical and some of the things mentioned I look back on and realize I have experienced.

duxx, phenomenal contribution, thank you.

When you perform, there is a tendency to perturb body homoeostasis. This perturbation strongly depend on your skill/abilities, or to say your muscle power, economy, elasticity etc. Your body wants to maintain homoeostasis, so it react by activating (in greater degree) the mechanisms for their maintenance (heart, lungs, termo regulation, etc.). As stated before, movement is interplay between stability/mobility, and if we draw a parallel, performance is the interplay of perturbation/manintenance of homoeostasis (can you see the similarity with Yin/Yang concept and dualism?).
According to Homoeostasis Performance Model, to improve performance, one should improve:
-Sport Specific Skills and Underlying Abilities (including morphotype)
-Ability(es) to mainatin homoeostasis
-Mental abilities
Your body never exit from homoeostasis limits, and if you tend to do it, your Central Governor reduces muscle output and increase RPE.
So, improving skills/abilities tend to increase homoestasis deteoriation during performance (except improving economy, elasticity etc). There is an interesting concept in Lore of Running book from Tim Noakes (which I started reading before couple of days), that when you want to improve muscles abilities (in long distance running) you should engage in oxygen enriched enviroment, rather than altitude training!!! On, my opinion this oxygen enriched enviroment allows you easyer maintenace of homooestasis, and thus greater stimulus for the muscles (you can achivere greater performance values). On the contrary, if you want to traing your homoeostasis maintenance abilitie(s), you should get into oxygen depleted (altitude) enviroment. But this kind of training will not optimally develop muscle factors…
Thus, the solution is that distance runners should engage into below seas training (oxygen enriched enviroment) to stimulate muscle factors, and in altitude training to stumulate homoeostasis maintenance abilities….

As stated in the Model update #1 from 12. december 2005, if we expand concept of homoeostasis to joint integrity, bone health and structural integrity of the body, we will soon see, that to achieve peak performance one should not only train Sport Specific Abilities and Skills, but also, an ability to maintain homoeostasis, or body integrity. This means, that during sport specific training, one should allow some time for training of joint integrity and overall integrity, thus minimizing muscle imbalances etc.
According to conjugate sequence system, one should train abilities in sequntial manner, but in the same time maintain non-specific abilities (and alredy developed specific ones), or in other word, one should maintain/improve their GPP (general physical preparedness) levels to allow improvement in SPP (special physical preparedness). For example, to achieve better performance in shot-put, one should train mostly for developing greater power in arm/legs, but in same time, one should also include minimal time training for non-dominant hand, back mucles etc. This is because development of greater power in arms tend to create greater stress at the arm joints, and if you don’t have also developed back muslces (rotator cuff, lats, traps etc) your joints tend to be pulled/clenched during performance, because you have not developed ability to maintain their integrity (homoeostasis).

In regards to update #4:“performance is the interplay of perturbation/maintenance of homoeostasis”

This is very similar to some aspect of control theory/game theory with the point being to maximize the output variable performance. You might want to look at some of this stuff for support of your model. (Particularly in the robust control of these situations, as one could argue that living systems are very robust). Depending on your math background, you might be able to leverage some of this to support your model (i know this helps with the thesis committee :slight_smile: ). If you are interested in this, i can explain more or pass on some references…

Quark, in shortly this is my ‘background’:

  • in elementary school programming in qBASIC
  • in high school programming in C/C++ and Assembler (creted one virus, OS and couple of games)
  • I finished Technical High School (computer technician)
  • before couple of years, while learning bimechanics, created in C++ simulator of terminal movements, without any knowledge I developed Euler and Runge-Kutta method of continuous simulation (without any background on this, I found this couple of years later… I wish I have born before :slight_smile: )
  • I found writting User Interface in C a 90% of work, limiting my time solving the ‘core problem’, so I tryed Mathematica (learned it)
  • On the suggestion of one proffesor, I tryed MATLAB - mastered it!
  • I created couple of models of motor control in MATLAB and various simulations (you got my program at Mathworks, look for Mladen Jovanovic)
  • Interested in simulation I started reading more on this topic - cybernetics, fuzzy logic, complex systems approach, system theory, chaos, chatastrophe theory…
  • and, yes, I got some knowledge with LabView!

Quark, I would be very happy if you could send me more on this topic, but try to be easyly digested… I got some elementary mathematical knowledge (differential equations, integrations, etc, but forget it if it includes muldidimensional cross product of 330 vectors :slight_smile: )
BTW, I would really wish to translate my recent seminar work, because I used cybernetical principles to explain training, planning and programming! It would be really a good read for someone who lack basic training theory but have cybernetical knowldege or vice versa…

ok. I will start looking through my references. I will post it when i get it together. Some control theory can get pretty ugly mathematically.

As a start, for some basics, i would look at one of Franklin’s books (Feedback Control, is the title i think). It is mostly on classical control theory (not terrible useful to you), but it will give you some basic terminology. Then i would move to a book about state-space control. I think some adaptive control or “intellegent” control would be useful for your model. Stay away from the literature as long as you can because the length of these paper often makes understanding them difficult without a lot of background.

In addition, find a full professor who knows this stuff well that you can talk to, that will make all of the difference. You can probably find one in a mechanical or electrical engineering department. Occasionally you find some in applied math.

Tnx quark!
Actually, homoeostasis is a region-zone in a state-space of human (there are 10000 dimensions of this space), and I got idea about this one when I read about it! Here are the books I have read about System theory-cybernetics:

  1. Kostić, M. (1987). Elementi teorije sistema i informacija. Beograd: Naučna knjiga.
    Our book, great read!
  2. Lerner, A.J. (1970). Principi kibernetike. Beograd: Tehnička knjiga.
    Exclellent book, without math! Everything is covered! It is a translatio of russian book
  3. Malacko, J. (2000). Osnove sportskog treninga. Beograd: Sportska akademija.
    Out sport theory expert. It shows how can cybernetics be applyed to training!

Homeostasis (as far as my understanding of it) as a non-mathmatical concept is a pretty well understood idea. The challenge is to extend it into a model in mathmatical terms. In a lot of ways this could be contrued as a combination between a system identification problem and a data mining problem. Even with 10000 (which is probably a really lower bound estimate) variables, this is not outside of level of current computing power. (Of course you would need something more powerful than a dual-core desktop.) The trick would be to obtain as much data as possible from a variety of subjects. Hook up a few people to a lot of daq boards and follow them through a training year. With all of the newer wireless sensors data-aquisition this shouldn’t be too much of a problem. Now getting subjects for this would be the challenge…talk about a lack of privacy :slight_smile:

The Human Performance Model (HPM) basically states that any kind of performance is limited by balance/harmony between two processes: homoeostasis break-down process (HBP) and homoeostasis maintenance process (HMP). If HBP is more powerfull than HMP then the performance will eventually stop because of developed fatigue. So, fatigue is not physiological impairment, but it is rather a control mechanism that prevents ruining of body-homoeostasis which can lead to injury and death. The body is smart… it is not just a machine listening to our motor commands…

In running, muscle action that creates GRF and actually propels you forward (and up) tend to perturb homoeostasis (joint stress, metabolites, stretch-shortening fatigue, tendon strains, usage of energy fuels – liver and muscle glycogen etc), and if your functional organs are unable to maintain homoeostasis there will be fatigue build-up and eventually decrease in running speed or stopping. Thus, running performance is limited by (a) ability of muscle system to produce power for running and (b) homoeostass maintenance ability (which depends on various factors)

If we expand concept of homoeostasis to joint integrity, we will soon see that HPM is applicable to resistance training. If your muscles are not in balance your main lifts will suffer. Altought your body have ability to lift 150kg on bench press it will not allow you this performance if your shoulder stability is poor due weak rotator cuff muscles (for example). Trying to lift more will eventually lead to injury if you succeed to by-pass control mechanism. Thus, the strength is limited by (a) potential strength ability and (b) homoeostasis control (muscle balance, structural integrity, joint stability/mobility etc.)

Another comparation is the following. You have Ferrari that have very powerfull engine and can go 400km/h. But, his brakes are poor. The question is how much will you push the gass pedal? How much will you allow yourself to go fast? 400? I don’t think so… maybe 100km/h max. Thus, your security is more important than the powerfull engine. To go faster you must first fix your brakes. Considering this for some athlete, he should (a)improve engine power and/or (b)improve braking system.

Another example is puch in boxing. You would love to speed up the puch and thus improve your ability to knock-out opponent and pass his defense. So, you start improving explosive strength of prime movers (triceps, deltoideus, pecs etc), but after some time you start to stagnate… You try to develop even more explosive strenght in prime movers but with no succes. The solution is to improve antagonist muscles that actually decelerate the moving limb. Your body will allow only the speeds of movement that will not cause injury to joints. Event if you have potential to move limb faster, you will be not allowed to do so until you „fix the brakes“.

GREAT POST in every single line!
About the above quote:aren’t the two factors cited (specific power and homeostasis energy reserves) the ultimate limiting factors in many sports other than running?

All this applies across a wide spectrum of events and sports,and…the general rules to manage the two complex factors apply everywhere!

great read… I’ll have t study it more before i can comment though.
I’am not so wel educated on the subject, just interested. So i have to read it more than twice to fully inderstand all.

Keep it up duxx.
I like your work

On the body is smart thing, I wonder if your body also “knows” how much energy you have and won’t let you use more than a given % at a time unless you override it (which can lead to bad things if done regularly). Also, I wonder if your body won’t let you shift into high gear unless you have enough energy. Jugging has made me think this over – I clearly have the hand speed to do some of the things I’ve worked on, and I should have enough strength to get the required power. So maybe my body won’t do it because “it knows” I’m kind of low on nervous energy (which I am) so it won’t let me do too much.

Thanks pakewi!
Yes, those two “factors” are applicable in wide specrtum of activities… this is what I wanted to say in Tempo??? thread… Homoeostasis break-down process(HBP) and homoeostasis maintenance process (HMP) can be viewed also as SPP vs. GPP… thus GPP opens a “window” of opportunity to build new levels of SPP… No GPP, no SPP!
Thus, according to HPM the body “never” leaves the boundaries of safety… You should have a optimal range of homoeostasis maintenance ability (GPP levels, work capacity) to improve the homoeostasis break-down process (specific power, SPP etc).

Thanks pindaman… I tryed to write it that is understandable to everybody…

May be, may be… :slight_smile:
Anyway, one of my teachers at faculty stated that the injury as a consequence of overtraining may be the last protection of the body from the “crazy owner”, and it can be speculated that the body injured itels purposely because this will force “crazy owner” to rest a little, and thus this will prevent more profound damage…

The thing that bothers me, as I already stated earlier is:
If the body limits maximal isometrical force (strength deficit) to protect tendons, joints etc, then why does it allows greater level of force in eccentric regime of contraction??
Is strength limited by strength ability solely or by control/safety mechanism or both? I would say both…

Bela Karolyi’s theory was that you can’t over work kids, because when they have done too much they will sit down and refuse to do anything. If there is some truth in that, maybe it’s because the factors you mention tell the body to stop, and only dopey grownups keep going.

Or maybe their motiv is joy… Or because they are lazy :smiley:
No seriously I agree with you on this… Maybe they know when is time to stop and listen to their bodies instinctively… They are also oriented to do what is joyable to do for them… Olders have different motivs like doing the wourkout as planned on paper! :smiley:

very intersting stuff duxx my compliments. i have talked to other coaches who are heading in the same dierction as you. the issue of training the body as a whole seems paramount. i have always wondered why some people choose to train their bodies in parts ie legs and back this day arms an chest this day. are there days where sprinters choose to not run with their arms? or perhaps a football linemen chooses to not use their delts during practice. the body is a whole working mechanism and you really hit on a hot button with the comment about how we should be training movements not muscles. if you ask an average athlete why do you squat they will say “to work my quats and glutes” (for example) not at all realzing that the goal in training should be to in essence teach yourself how to move properly, in a biomechanically effecient manner. there is one given way to best use your muscles (from a biomechanical prospective) and achieving that athletically is asymptotal, as in there is a point at which you would most effeciently use the power that your muscles can develope syncronously but of course no one has or will ever move perfectly its about moving towards that infinitude of perfection. for example, and this is a ruff example. if your bench technique would be made perfect by having your arm at a 90 degree angle your bench would never be perfect but training should be about achieving that perfect form and we reach for it and reach for it but it will be always out of our reach just like it is impossible to make a perfect cirlce. ofcourse we can achieve effecientcy within a spectrum our goal as humans is to narrow that spectrum and contiually work our ways toward perfection of movement. people bench and squat with no care for muscle activation paterns muscle timing patterns and so on. they are in essence like you mentioned before training muscles. this becomes increasingly difficult when we consider the balisticism of sport. athletics greatly depends on the feedforward mechanisms instead of the feedback. even if you are in the middle of a 200 m and you notice your form is wrong you can change future strides but cannot change them as they occur because of the rapidity of motion. these movements have become a spinal reflex (for lack of a better word). so training should address this as best possible. if you put an athlete in a given postion, biomechanically effecient, and train him in that position so that it is carried over in squat bench lunge or whatever the given excercise it will transfer to the sport. whoa duxx you got me a bit excited on this topic great job i look forward to continued discussion in this area.

First of all, thanks for kind words… I am looking forward to futher discussion and contribution from various members. If you have time take a look at Richard Gibbens articles and Tim Noakes work at www.powerrunning.com.
This is the place where everything started in my head… great read, trust me! It will change your view at physiology as it have changed mine!

This is why Charlie stated that foot contact is to short to be changed voluntary, so you have to make prior adjustments before even hiting the ground with the foot! (this quote is somewhere on the site or in Forum Review. I can’t even remember where did I have read Dr. Evil’s unique pearls of wisdom)

I would make sure to avoid evoking any “pyramid” concept though…for the very reason you cited.Does a wider base really allows for a higher peak?
Not really at least in my very experience. Do things have to be somehow balanced out? Yes,for athletic improvement and well being to come.
We all need to start thinking BALANCE FIRST.
THe individual dimensions of the balanced state are just that : individual!

I’m not sure, but to me, the homeostasis model somehow resembles Maturana’s and Varela’s autopoietic (self-referental) system explanation. Perhaps take a look at autopoiesis? It’s a biological model that basically refers to a kind of self-organizing logic. In a way, the logic of the system is to reproduce itself despite energy moving in an out (through) the system. The basic example is the biological cell; basically reproducing itself as a distinct own structure, yet having energy flowing in and out through the system. Hence the basic logic of that living system is to ‘maintain its own organization’.

However, the whole human “body” (I know your predilection for dualism, so let’s leave the “dance of particles” – the problems of such distinction – out for now) is, in a way, also self-referential (to continue living), but also have the characteristics of non-equilibrium – how else would change be possible; we grow as well as age; we train and increase our performance. Training is a way of introducing “chaos” (entropy) to the system, thus creating (when we improve), what Prigogine would call a ‘dissipative structure’. A dissipative structure is basically a higher order of equilibrium (in thermodynamics).

I’m not sure how this relates to the homeostasis performance model, but I think you could take a look at these two theories, and perhaps find some reference/resemblance to your thesis?

Your post is enlighting as always pakewi!
I mentioned that HBP and HMP are “simmilar” to SPP and GPP, but they are NOT synonims… If you are a shot putter, bench press is a GPP mean to you, but again you must BALANCE the things with pulling motion which is also GPP mean… So there is HBP and HMP in GPP as in SPP means…
I tottaly agree on the pyramid concept and wider base! The question here is can the HBP and HMP be trained separatelly or can they ever be splited and indentified??? I would say NO! They are just concepts that helps me to clarify some things!
We should find/indentify individual BALANCE between conceptual HBP and HMP, GPP and SPP etc as you have stated

Regarding distance running… HBP would be maximal speed on short distance while HMP would be, call it, aerobic endurance. While speed training in long distance runners can reprogram central governonr and allow higher speeds (and the athlete is adapting to run at higher speed which is something new to him, because too much of long slow distance can force the athlete’s CNS to adapt running at a given pace) it can also improve elasticity and thus improve HMP (improving running eficacy and thus smaller homoeostasis perturbations at a given pace).
If athlete reaches very high level of aerobic endurance (HMP) which is common in high level runners, his speed reserve drops (difference between 100m run max speed and 100m pace at a given race) and he should thus improve his power of running (HBP).
Thus, it is difficult to indentify factors of HBP and HMP, but I use them to clarify some things. You can find more about my approach to distance running here