MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909587652 · doi:10.5539/mas.v13n2p132

A New Dataset method for Biomechanical Training Model of the Free Throws Shots in Basketball Using Image Processing Technique

2019· article· en· W2909587652 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sumaia Saraireh, Ahmad B. Hassanat, Mohammad Abu Al-Taieb, Hashem Kilani

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasketballComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Ball (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceSagittal planeComputer visionTraining setMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work provides a new dataset method intended to build a biomechanical training model for the free-throws shots in basketball. Eight youth players from Jordanian secondary public school were video recorded from the sagittal plane executing free throw shots in basketball. Collectively (480) video clips were recorded and analyzed using image processing techniques to identify the ball track. Video processing involves extracting (11) different parameters that may affect the free throw in basketball game after detecting the ball trajectory. Creation of this dataset and its subsequent use for extracting free-throws information yielded several insights. First, a set of most important features were identified as those affecting the free-throws score in basketball. Second, our data set can be trained and tested using machine learning classifiers for building a new biomechanical training model based on set of rules that can be useful for both trainers and trainee to rehearse on successful free-throws in basketball. The dataset is being made publicly available at www.ju.edu.jo.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207