Multijoint Coordination Contributes to the Minimization of Frontal Plane Center-of-Mass Displacement in Maximal Velocity Sprinting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies on sprinting biomechanics have identified a variety of biomechanical characteristics that describe the outcome of improved sprint technique but in doing so have neglected to identify the postural control strategies that lead to improved sprint performance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between frontal plane displacement of the center of mass (CoM) and sprint velocity, and to understand if multijoint coordination of the limbs and trunk were associated with minimizing the displacement. The results from this study suggest that stance phase frontal plane CoM cumulative path length is significantly associated with sprint velocity. Further, a multivariate linear regression model revealed that coordinative couplings of the bilateral limbs and trunk were associated with the minimization of the frontal plane CoM displacement. Specifically, the coordination of the knees (flexion-extension) and axial rotation of the thorax-pelvis were the most important interjoint couplings in minimizing frontal plane CoM displacement. Frontal plane CoM displacement provides coaches, athletes, and performance professionals with an interpretable metric to identify sprint technique quality in field using wearable sensors. Future work needs to further advance our understanding of postural control during sprinting so that effective coaching and rehabilitation interventions can be designed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".