Alphatek Research Library
Alfaro & Matre 2022 – COM vs. barbell velocity
COM speeds slightly lower than bar-velocity; load zones must be device-specific.
Read Full PaperBjelland 2024 – Readiness & autoregulation
Subjective readiness + rep speed best predict daily volume; 30 % VL autoregulates better than 20 %.
Read Full PaperBjørnsen 2024 – In-season traffic-light
Maintained higher rep speeds all season, enhancing strength/power gains.
Read Full PaperDahle 2023 – Force-plate validation
AlphaPWR V2.0 < 1 % bias vs. AMTI; lab-grade accuracy confirmed.
Read Full PaperKaspersen 2024 – Device VL comparison
Force-plate reaches VL thresholds 2-3 reps sooner than encoder due to higher rep variability.
Read Full PaperLiverød 2023 – Feedback carry-over
Velocity gains from visual feedback persist into later no-feedback sets.
Read Full PaperNyquist 2023 – 20 % vs. 40 % VL (hockey)
40 % VL produced larger leg-press strength gains; hypertrophy unchanged.
Read Full PaperPedersen Åreide 2023 – Objective vs. subjective cues
Lifters sense bar speed well, but AlphaPWR data tighten load control.
Read Full PaperRemme 2023 – VL & maximal power
40 % VL raised lower-limb power; sprint/jump unchanged vs. 20 % VL.
Read Full PaperStenrød 2023 – Physiotherapy interviews
Real-time force-plate feedback boosts motivation and individualises rehab.
Read Full PaperVormeland Paulsen 2024 – Traffic-light feedback
Color-coded VL kept speed higher, + 20 % reps, and boosted squat 1 RM + CMJ.
Read Full PaperReady to bring objective data to your practice?
See for yourself how Alphatek can transform training and rehabilitation for your organisation. Book a no-obligation demo with one of our experts today.
Book a Demo Now