MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Improving Accuracy and Runtime of Skeletal Tracking of Lower Limbs for Athletic Jump Mechanics Assessment

2021· article· en· W4200224248 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 43rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJumpInferencePoseKey (lock)Tracking (education)EstimationFunction (biology)Biomechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have shown that athletic jump mechanics assessments are valuable tools for identifying indicators of an individual's anterior cruciate ligament injury risk. These assessments, such as the drop jump test, often relied on camera systems or sensors that are not always accessible nor practical for screening individuals in a sports setting. As human pose estimation deep learning models improve, we envision transitioning biometrical assessments to mobile devices. As such, here we have addressed two of the most preclusive hindrances of the current state-of-the-art models: accuracy of the lower limb joint prediction and the slow run-time of in-the-wild inference. We tackle the issue of accuracy by adding a post-processing step that is compatible with all inference methods that outputs 3D key points. Additionally, to overcome the lengthy inference rate, we propose a depth estimation method that runs in real-time and can function with any 2D human pose estimation model that outputs COCO key points. Our solution, paired with a state-of-the-art model for 3D human pose estimation, significantly increased lower-limb positional accuracy. Furthermore, when paired with our real-time joint depth estimation algorithm, it is a plausible solution for developing the first mobile device prototype for athlete jump mechanics 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 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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 43rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC)→Same topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques→French-language works237,207→