## 3 Results  
### Intra-Session Reliability  
Tables 1 and 2 show the intra-session reliability in raw (original data) and fitted (filtered data), respectively. MVC, RFD\({}_{0-150}\), RFD\({}_{0-250}\) and Impulse\({}_{0-250}\) were moderate-to-high reliable since Session 1 in both raw (CV ranges: 7.0 to 13.3%, ICC ranges: 0.887 to 0.976) and fitted (CV ranges: 5.9 to 12.2%, ICC ranges: 0.921 to 0.958) data. These results improved in Session 2 up to showing a high reliability in both raw and fitted (CV \(\leq\) 9.3% ICC \(\geq\) 0.958). Additionally, Impulse\({}_{0-150}\) reached an acceptable reliability in Session 2 (CV \(\leq\) 11.9% ICC \(\geq\) 0.954), with slightly better results in fitted data. RFD\({}_{0-50}\) was readable with a moderate reliability (CV \(\leq\) 13.6% ICC \(\geq\) 0.941) in Session 2 with fitted signal. Impulse\({}_{0-50}\) showed nearly reliable readings in Session 2 with fitted signal (CV \(\leq\) 15.8% ICC \(\geq\) 0.929). RFD\({}_{\rm max}\) achieved moderately reliable records in Session 2 but only in dominant leg raw data. Fitted data were equally reliable for dominant and non-dominant legs, whilst raw data showed particular differences. Asymmetries trended to diminish after the familiarization, especially during early phases of contraction (0-50 ms), with all the participants showing optimal values \(<\) 15% in the second session. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Raw Data**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Dominant Leg**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Non-Dominant Leg**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Diff\%**} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{6-9}  & **M (SD)** & **CV** & **SEM** & **ICC** & **M (SD)** & **CV** & **SEM** & **ICC** \\ \hline MVC (_N_) & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 649 (115) & 9.1\% & 59.9 & 0.887 & 596 (91) & 5.8\% & 34.0 & 0.869 & \(-\)8.9\% \\ Session 2 & 676 (117) & 5.0\% & 33.9 & 0.966 & 618 (102) & 4.4\% & 26.9 & 0.975 & \(-\)8.3\% \\ Impulse\({}_{0-50}\) (_N_) & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 7.1 (3.7) & 37.8\% & 2.6 & 0.788 & 6.2 (3.3) & 29.3\% & 1.8 & 0.896 & \(-\)10.2\% \\ Session 2 & 7.6 (3.1) & 30.3\% & 2.2 & 0.798 & 7.3 (3.3) & 21.5\% & 1.6 & 0.815 & \(-\)2.4\% \\ Impulse\({}_{0-10}\) (_N_) & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 48.6 (15.1) & 16.0\% & 7.8 & 0.910 & 42.9 (14.0) & 11.9\% & 5.1 & 0.956 & \(-\)13.1\% \\ Session 2 & 49.5 (14.0) & 10.7\% & 5.3 & 0.954 & 45.8 (13.5) & 16.6\% & 7.6 & 0.909 & \(-\)8.0\% \\ Impulse\({}_{2-50}\) (_N_+_) & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 102.8 (26.2) & 11.7\% & 12.0 & 0.928 & 93.4 (24.8) & 8.2\% & 7.7 & 0.969 & \(-\)10.0\% \\ Session 2 & 105.1 (25.1) & 6.7\% & 7.0 & 0.976 & 96.6 (24.1) & 12.7\% & 12.2 & 0.926 & \(-\)8.8\% \\ ESPD\({}_{0-3}\) (_N_+_) & & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 4446 (2275) & 34.8\% & 1548 & 0.802 & 3959 (229) & 26.9\% & 1064 & 0.914 & \(-\)12.4\% \\ Session 2 & 4667 (1951) & 21.8\% & 1016 & 0.901 & 4256 (1089) & 32.1\% & 1367 & 0.816 & \(-\)9.7\% \\ FPD\({}_{0-150}\) (_N_+_) & & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 3074 (695) & 8.3\% & 254 & 0.956 & 2771 (706) & 13.3\% & 369 & 0.934 & \(-\)10.9\% \\ Session 2 & 3087 (760) & 8.0\% & 247 & 0.966 & 2881 (677) & 9.3\% & 268 & 0.959 & \(-\)7.2\% \\ RFD\({}_{0-250}\) (_N_+_) & & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 2122 (426) & 7.0\% & 148 & 0.959 & 1954 (340) & 9.6\% & 189 & 0.950 & \(-\)8.6\% \\ Session 2 & 2211 (491) & 7.1\% & 170 & 0.958 & 2100 (93) & 6.0\% & 122 & 0.968 & \(-\)10.0\% \\ RFD\({}_{0-150}\) (_N_+_) & & & & & & & & & \\ Session 1 & 6988 (2278) & 16.2\% & 1135 & 0.912 & 6118 (1933) & 21.3\% & 1302 & 0.944 & \(-\)14.2\% \\ Session 2 & 7098 (2346) & 12.7\% & 899 & 0.952 & 6800 (1858) & 24.4\% & 1660 & 0.874 & \(-\)4.4\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Intra-session reliability in maximal voluntary contraction force (MVC), impulse, and rate of force development (RFD) variables for original data (raw).