I was shown this graph in a college PE class on general fitness. I remember the general shape, and that the bottom metric was in reference to the number of days per week that a person exercised. The general point was that if you worked out 1-2 days per week you saw some but little benefit. If you exercised 3-4 days per week, there were dramatic increases. 5 days still got a measurable increase, but 6-7 days were pretty much a waste of "efficient" time. Can you tell me where this came from, what the metric on the left side is, and if it still holds true with today's knowledge. enter image description here

  • Data above is fictitious and is made-up in an attempt to recreate the one I saw. – Jammin4CO Jun 22 '15 at 17:28
  • +1 Seems like a question I wouldn't mind seeing the answer to :). – Kneel-Before-ZOD Jun 22 '15 at 17:32
  • argh. I know I've seen this somewhere as well. – JohnP Jun 22 '15 at 21:44
  • I suppose I'll have to leave this question unanswered. CanESER provided a very nice current alternative so I granted a +1, but it did not answer this question. – Jammin4CO Jun 29 '15 at 17:03

It is AAEI(Accumulated Activity Effective Index)

enter image description here

You can see here


  • 1
    Why don't you add some text on what the index means? – FredrikD Jun 23 '15 at 11:18
  • 1
    I think its more clear now ;) @FredrikD Thanks for your suggestion – CanESER Jun 23 '15 at 11:22
  • I could be wrong, but, I think FredrikD meant a generic explanation rather than a copy of the formula from the web page. – rrirower Jun 23 '15 at 13:13
  • 1
    This is the right concept. But figure 3 in the referenced article shows large gains on day 1. The graph I saw showed the most gains on day 4, next best was day 3, third best on day 5. With moderate gains on days 2 and 6. Looks like we are on the right track though. Also, the article referenced was published on Jan. 6 2015 and I saw this data in 1996-7. Perhaps it has been superseded? – Jammin4CO Jun 23 '15 at 13:25
  • In my opinion there is so much difference between person who doesn't train and train once a week. So decreasingly growing seems more logical for me. @Jammin4CO – CanESER Jun 23 '15 at 13:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.