MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108749028 · doi:10.18280/jesa.530516

Three-Dimensional Image Recognition of Athletes' Wrong Motions Based on Edge Detection

2020· article· en· W3108749028 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicE-commerce and Technology Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)Edge detectionEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMotion (physics)Image (mathematics)Tracking (education)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The traditional 3D visual motion amplitude tracking algorithms cannot acquire the complete contour features, not to mention the correction of wrong motions in sports training. To solve the problem, this paper designs a 3D visual image recognition method based on contourlet domain edge detection, and applies it to the recognition of athlete’s wrong motions in sports training. Firstly, the visual reconstruction and feature analysis of human motions were carried out, and the edge detection features were extracted by edge detection algorithm. Then, a 3D visual motion amplitude tracking method was proposed based on improved inverse kinematics. The simulation results show that the proposed algorithm can effectively realize the recognition of 3D visual images of athlete motions, and improve the correction and judgment ability of athlete motions.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.204 · 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