MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582817855 · doi:10.1177/1754337115594501

Automatic jump detection in skiing/snowboarding using head-mounted MEMS inertial and pressure sensors

2015· article· en· W2582817855 on OpenAlexaff
Tien Jung Lee, Shaghayegh Zihajehzadeh, Darrell Loh, Reynald Hoskinson, Edward J. Park

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part P Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWinter Sports Injuries and Performance
Canadian institutionsRecon Instruments (Canada)Simon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInertial measurement unitAccelerationJumpMicroelectromechanical systemsSensitivity (control systems)Step detectionAccelerometerPressure sensorComputer scienceWearable computerSimulationAcousticsInertial frame of referenceEngineeringComputer visionMechanical engineeringElectronic engineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsEmbedded systemNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With advancing technology in the miniature microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) sensors, wearable devices are becoming increasingly popular, facilitating convenient activity detection. One particular application is in sports performance monitoring. This article presents a novel real-time jump detection algorithm in skiing and snowboarding using a microelectromechanical systems–based inertial measurement unit, which is integrated with a barometric pressure sensor. The key performance variables of the jump can be extracted and evaluated for training and/or entertainment purposes. In contrast to the existing jump detection algorithms based on acceleration signals, the proposed algorithm uses vertical velocity and air time in addition to acceleration in the vertical direction. The experimental results show that by incorporating the velocity and air time into the detection algorithm, the sensitivity and specificity increase dramatically to 92% and 93%, respectively.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part P Journal of Sports Engineering and TechnologySame topicWinter Sports Injuries and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207