MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2351907962

An innovative approach for real time determination of power and reaction time in a martial arts quasi- training environment using 3D motion capture and EMG measurements

2011· article· en· W2351907962 on OpenAlexaff
Shao-Tsung Chang, Jared Evans, Sarah A Crowe, Xiang Zhang, Gongbing Shan

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Budo · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMartial artsKinematicsComputer scienceBiofeedbackTraining (meteorology)Power (physics)Motion captureMotion (physics)AthletesPunchingSimulationArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringPhysical therapyMedicineMechanical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Power and neural response are two fundamental elements in many martial arts striking. Currently, there are no practical methods exist to present these aspects to coaches and athletes in a training environment. This study introduced a new method for quantifying the two factors that could be used in real-time biofeedback training. Material/Methods: The new method consisted of self-developed optical signal system, EMG measurement and 3D motion capture. The quantification was done by using kinematics of the punching bag and striking limbs analyzed with self-developed dynamic calculation programs. The setup was very close to a training environment with neglect-able influence on an athlete performance. Results: The results showed that such quantification provided both total power and power components (i.e. linear & angular) of striking as well as the related response processes/time. Conclusions: Since the method could offer feedback of power intensity, attack accuracy, central and peripheral reaction time to coachers and athletes, it would have great potential to become a biofeedback tool in practice for increasing training efficiency and effectiveness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of BudoSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207