MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387961266 · doi:10.1145/3606038.3616163

Mitigating Motion Blur for Robust 3D Baseball Player Pose Modeling for Pitch Analysis

2023· article· en· W4387961266 on OpenAlexaff
Jerrin Bright, Yuhao Chen, John Zelek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion blurPoseLeverage (statistics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionEstimatorRobustness (evolution)Pipeline (software)LimitingMotion (physics)EngineeringImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using videos to analyze pitchers in baseball can play a vital role in strategizing and injury prevention. Computer vision-based pose analysis offers a time-eficient and cost-effective approach. However, the use of accessible broadcast videos, with a 30fps framerate, often results in partial body motion blur during fast actions, limiting the performance of existing pose keypoint estimation models. Previous works have primarily relied on fixed backgrounds, assuming minimal motion differences between frames, or utilized multiview data to address this problem. To this end, we propose a synthetic data augmentation pipeline to enhance the model's capability to deal with the pitcher's blurry actions. In addition, we leverage in-the-wild videos to make our model robust under different real-world conditions and camera positions. By carefully optimizing the augmentation parameters, we observed a notable reduction in the loss by 54.2% and 36.2% on the test dataset for 2D and 3D pose estimation respectively. By applying our approach to existing state-of-the-art pose estimators, we demonstrate an average improvement of 29.2%. The findings highlight the effectiveness of our method in mitigating the challenges posed by motion blur, thereby enhancing the overall quality of pose estimation.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207