IMU-based identification of rowing conditions through supervised machine learning.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Anna Leber, Tobias Siebert, Walter Rapp, Steffen Held
{"title":"IMU-based identification of rowing conditions through supervised machine learning.","authors":"Anna Leber, Tobias Siebert, Walter Rapp, Steffen Held","doi":"10.1186/s13102-026-02082-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rowing combines on-water and ergometer-based training, while inertial measurement units (IMUs) offer a practical approach for field-based biomechanical monitoring. This study examined whether trunk-mounted IMU data can distinguish static Concept2 (C2), dynamic RP3, and on-water rowing conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten youth rowers (16.3 ± 0.8 years) performed high-intensity rowing in all three conditions. Triaxial acceleration and gyroscope data were recorded at 208 Hz. Six classical machine-learning and four deep-learning models classified overlapping three-stroke windows using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. Repeated-measures analyses assessed condition-specific IMU magnitude features.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ensemble achieved the highest mean accuracy (85.5 ± 10.3%). Individual accuracy varied from 24.0% to 97.1% across models and athletes. The 7,545 windows were imbalanced toward Boat, with a no-information rate of 71.8%. Boat was identified most reliably, whereas RP3 was frequently misclassified as Boat. Nine of ten magnitude features remained significant after false-discovery-rate correction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trunk-mounted IMU signals distinguished the three rowing conditions at group level. However, class imbalance, RP3 familiarity, measurement order, boat-standardisation asymmetry, and athlete-level variability require cautious interpretation. Applied use requires athlete-specific calibration and prospective validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48585,"journal":{"name":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13576188/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-026-02082-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Rowing combines on-water and ergometer-based training, while inertial measurement units (IMUs) offer a practical approach for field-based biomechanical monitoring. This study examined whether trunk-mounted IMU data can distinguish static Concept2 (C2), dynamic RP3, and on-water rowing conditions.

Methods: Ten youth rowers (16.3 ± 0.8 years) performed high-intensity rowing in all three conditions. Triaxial acceleration and gyroscope data were recorded at 208 Hz. Six classical machine-learning and four deep-learning models classified overlapping three-stroke windows using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. Repeated-measures analyses assessed condition-specific IMU magnitude features.

Results: The ensemble achieved the highest mean accuracy (85.5 ± 10.3%). Individual accuracy varied from 24.0% to 97.1% across models and athletes. The 7,545 windows were imbalanced toward Boat, with a no-information rate of 71.8%. Boat was identified most reliably, whereas RP3 was frequently misclassified as Boat. Nine of ten magnitude features remained significant after false-discovery-rate correction.

Conclusions: Trunk-mounted IMU signals distinguished the three rowing conditions at group level. However, class imbalance, RP3 familiarity, measurement order, boat-standardisation asymmetry, and athlete-level variability require cautious interpretation. Applied use requires athlete-specific calibration and prospective validation.

通过监督机器学习基于imu的划船条件识别。
赛艇结合了水上训练和基于测重计的训练,而惯性测量单元(imu)为基于现场的生物力学监测提供了一种实用的方法。本研究检验了安装在躯干上的IMU数据是否能够区分静态Concept2 (C2)、动态RP3和水上划船情况。方法:10名青少年赛艇运动员(16.3±0.8岁)在所有三种情况下进行高强度赛艇。三轴加速度和陀螺仪数据记录在208hz。六种经典机器学习模型和四种深度学习模型使用留一主体交叉验证对重叠的三笔画窗口进行分类。重复测量分析评估了特定条件下的IMU大小特征。结果:该集合的平均准确率最高(85.5±10.3%)。模型和运动员的个体准确率从24.0%到97.1%不等。7545个窗口向Boat方向不平衡,无信息率为71.8%。Boat是最可靠的识别,而RP3经常被错误地分类为Boat。在错误发现率校正后,十分之九的震级特征仍然显著。结论:躯干上的IMU信号在组水平上区分了三种划船情况。然而,阶级不平衡、RP3熟悉度、测量顺序、船标准化不对称和运动员水平的可变性需要谨慎解释。实际使用需要针对运动员的校准和前瞻性验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
196
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation is an open access, peer reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of sports medicine and the exercise sciences, including rehabilitation, traumatology, cardiology, physiology, and nutrition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书