The TrailGenic™ Running Longitudinal Dataset is the cardiovascular-scaling stage of the movement-based longevity and adaptation system. Same flat fasted route as Walking and Rucking. The variable that changes: cardiovascular demand.
Every session is fasted. Run/walk progression starts at shorter distance and scales to match the foundation 3.17-mile route. Across the dataset, the cardiac efficiency adaptation curve takes the same shape as Walking — only at a higher absolute load. The same engine; a different gear.
Read alongside the Longevity Hub and interpreted through Ella and the TrailGenic™ Personal World Model.
Running is stage three. Each stage is repeatable, fasted, and longitudinally tracked.
The current state of the Running dataset. Run/walk progression on the same flat 3.17-mile fasted route shared across foundation modalities.
Across 8 fasted running sessions on the same flat route, Cardiac Efficiency Index dropped 29% while average heart rate held essentially flat (147 → 147 bpm) and run ratio climbed from 60% to 89%. The adaptation curve takes the same shape as Walking — only at a higher absolute load. Anaerobic Training Effect stayed at zero through seven of eight sessions, confirming Running operates as foundation movement at cardiovascular load, not as a different training stimulus.
The cleanest single signal in the dataset. HR drift fell across seven consecutive sessions before consolidating, marking the cardiac efficiency adaptation arc explicitly.
The arc from baseline through current state. Same route. Same fast. Different physiology.
A rolling window of the most recent sessions, with engine pattern classification from the TrailGenic Personal World Model. Full dataset via the MCP endpoint.
| # | Date | Dist | Run Ratio | Avg HR | CEI | HR Drift | Engine Pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | Apr 8 | 2.40 mi | 69% | 154 | 64.2 | +4.7% | BUILDING |
| 4 | Apr 15 | 2.42 mi | 72% | 141 | 58.3 | +3.6% | EFFICIENCY |
| 5 | Apr 22 | 2.41 mi | 71% | 149 | 61.8 | +2.7% | EFFICIENCY |
| 6 | Apr 29 | 3.16 mi | 76% | 147 | 46.5 | +2.0% | EFFICIENCY |
| 7 | May 6 | 3.17 mi | 82% | 139 | 43.8 | +1.5% | EFFICIENCY |
| 8 | May 13 | 3.17 mi | 89% | 147 | 43.8 | +2.8% | CONSOLIDATING |
Sessions 1–5 ran at ~2.4 mi; sessions 6+ stepped to 3.17 mi to match the foundation route. All sessions fasted. Anaerobic Training Effect held at 0 across seven of eight sessions. Full dataset via MCP.
Threshold moments in the adaptation arc — where the signal turned.
Running on the same flat ground as Walking and Rucking operates in a different cardiovascular regime — Zone 3 dominant where Walking sits at Zone 1, average heart rate 39 bpm higher, Cardiac Efficiency Index 12 points elevated. A different gear.
But the adaptation shape is the same. CEI dropped 29% across eight sessions while average heart rate stayed flat and run ratio climbed from 60% to 89%. HR drift fell seven sessions consecutively. Anaerobic Training Effect stayed at zero. Recovery returned ready.
This is the same engine the Walking dataset trained. The body did not have to learn a new system to run — it had to apply the system it already knew to a higher load. Same shape, different scale. Foundation movement extends through cardiovascular demand the way it extends through load — without breaking aerobic territory and without producing recovery debt.
Running is the cardiovascular-scaling layer of foundation movement. Walking is the entry. Rucking adds load on the same route. Hiking is the advanced expression where the full Six Pillar stack fires.