Augmented Reality Approach for Marker-based Posture Measurement on Smartphones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marker tracking for postural and range of motion (ROM) measurements transcends multiple disciplines (e.g., healthcare, ergonomics, engineering). A viable real-time mobile application is currently lacking for measuring limb angles and body posture. To address this need, a novel Android smartphone augmented-reality-based application was developed using the AprilTag2 fiducial marker system. To evaluate the app, two markers were printed on paper and attached to a wall. A Samsung S6 mobile phone was fixed on a tripod, parallel to the wall. The smartphone app tracked and recorded marker orientation and 2D position data in the camera frame, from front and rear cameras, for different smartphone placements. The average error between mobile phone and measured angles was less than 1 degree for all test settings (back camera=0.29°, front camera=0.33°, yaw rotation=0.75°, tilt rotation=0.22°). The average error between mobile phone and measured distance was less than 4 mm for all test settings (back camera=1.8 mm, front camera=2.5 mm, yaw rotation=3 mm, tilt rotation=3.8 mm). Overall, the app obtained valid and reliable angle and distance measurements with smartphone positions and cameras that would be expected in practice. Thus, this app is viable for clinical ROM and posture assessments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".