基于标记和无标记的马术骑手运动分析的动作捕捉:比较研究

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS
Heather Cameron-Whytock , Hannah Divall , Martin Lewis , Charlotte Apps
{"title":"基于标记和无标记的马术骑手运动分析的动作捕捉:比较研究","authors":"Heather Cameron-Whytock ,&nbsp;Hannah Divall ,&nbsp;Martin Lewis ,&nbsp;Charlotte Apps","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The study hypothesised that a markerless motion capture system can provide kinematic data comparable to a traditional marker-based system for riders mounted on a horse. The objective was to assess the markerless system’s accuracy by directly comparing joint and segment angle measurements taken during walking and trotting with those obtained from a marker-based system. Ten healthy adult participants performed five dynamic trials during walking and trotting. A twelve-camera marker-based system and eight-camera 2D video-based system were synchronised. Three-dimensional hip, knee, shoulder and elbow joint angles, and the global trunk and pelvis angle were computed for comparison between the two systems. To assess the error between systems, the root mean square difference (RMSD) was averaged across each gait cycle and statistical parametric mapping (SPM) paired t-tests were applied. The sagittal trunk angle had the lowest RMSD of 2.0° and elbow rotation had the highest RMSD of 19°, with the same values for walking and trotting. SPM indicated increased hip flexion (0–100 %, p &lt; 0.001) and elbow flexion (24–47 %, p = 0.03; 63–100 %, p &lt; 0.001) in the walking gait cycle for the markerless system. A lack of joint range of motion and obscured medial limbs during walking whilst mounted on horses may cause increased offsets for markerless data in equestrian riders. No significant differences were found for the transverse plane, yet there tended to be increased RMSD. This lack of consistency suggests results from the transverse plane in equestrian riders should be interpreted with caution. Study findings indicate that markerless technology has the potential to be a suitable alternative to marker-based systems for assessment of equestrian riders, dependent on the segment/joint angle of interest and the level of acceptable error. These results indicate that markerless systems can effectively be utilised for rider biofeedback, though their application may be limited for specific joint analyses.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"186 ","pages":"Article 112728"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Marker based and markerless motion capture for equestrian rider kinematic analysis: A comparative study\",\"authors\":\"Heather Cameron-Whytock ,&nbsp;Hannah Divall ,&nbsp;Martin Lewis ,&nbsp;Charlotte Apps\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112728\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The study hypothesised that a markerless motion capture system can provide kinematic data comparable to a traditional marker-based system for riders mounted on a horse. The objective was to assess the markerless system’s accuracy by directly comparing joint and segment angle measurements taken during walking and trotting with those obtained from a marker-based system. Ten healthy adult participants performed five dynamic trials during walking and trotting. A twelve-camera marker-based system and eight-camera 2D video-based system were synchronised. Three-dimensional hip, knee, shoulder and elbow joint angles, and the global trunk and pelvis angle were computed for comparison between the two systems. To assess the error between systems, the root mean square difference (RMSD) was averaged across each gait cycle and statistical parametric mapping (SPM) paired t-tests were applied. The sagittal trunk angle had the lowest RMSD of 2.0° and elbow rotation had the highest RMSD of 19°, with the same values for walking and trotting. SPM indicated increased hip flexion (0–100 %, p &lt; 0.001) and elbow flexion (24–47 %, p = 0.03; 63–100 %, p &lt; 0.001) in the walking gait cycle for the markerless system. A lack of joint range of motion and obscured medial limbs during walking whilst mounted on horses may cause increased offsets for markerless data in equestrian riders. No significant differences were found for the transverse plane, yet there tended to be increased RMSD. This lack of consistency suggests results from the transverse plane in equestrian riders should be interpreted with caution. Study findings indicate that markerless technology has the potential to be a suitable alternative to marker-based systems for assessment of equestrian riders, dependent on the segment/joint angle of interest and the level of acceptable error. These results indicate that markerless systems can effectively be utilised for rider biofeedback, though their application may be limited for specific joint analyses.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"volume\":\"186 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112728\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of biomechanics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025002404\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025002404","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该研究假设,无标记运动捕捉系统可以为骑在马上的骑手提供与传统的基于标记的系统相当的运动学数据。目的是评估无标记系统的准确性,通过直接比较行走和小跑期间所采取的关节和节段角度测量与基于标记的系统获得的测量结果。10名健康的成年参与者在步行和小跑中进行了5次动态试验。一个基于12个摄像头的标记系统和一个基于8个摄像头的二维视频系统被同步。计算髋关节、膝关节、肩关节和肘关节的三维角度,以及躯干和骨盆的整体角度,以比较两种系统。为了评估系统之间的误差,对每个步态周期的均方根差(RMSD)取平均值,并应用统计参数映射(SPM)配对t检验。躯干矢状角RMSD最低,为2.0°,肘部旋转RMSD最高,为19°,步行和小跑的RMSD值相同。SPM提示髋屈曲增加(0 - 100%,p <;0.001)和肘关节屈曲(24 - 47%,p = 0.03;63 - 100%, p <;0.001),对于无标记系统的步行步态周期。在骑马行走时,关节活动范围的缺乏和内侧肢体的模糊可能会导致马术骑手对无标记数据的偏移增加。横切面无显著性差异,但RMSD有增加的趋势。这种缺乏一致性的结果表明,从横切面在马术骑手应谨慎解释。研究结果表明,无标记技术有可能成为基于标记系统的评估马术骑手的合适替代方案,这取决于节段/关节的兴趣角度和可接受的误差水平。这些结果表明,无标记系统可以有效地用于骑手生物反馈,尽管它们的应用可能仅限于特定的联合分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Marker based and markerless motion capture for equestrian rider kinematic analysis: A comparative study
The study hypothesised that a markerless motion capture system can provide kinematic data comparable to a traditional marker-based system for riders mounted on a horse. The objective was to assess the markerless system’s accuracy by directly comparing joint and segment angle measurements taken during walking and trotting with those obtained from a marker-based system. Ten healthy adult participants performed five dynamic trials during walking and trotting. A twelve-camera marker-based system and eight-camera 2D video-based system were synchronised. Three-dimensional hip, knee, shoulder and elbow joint angles, and the global trunk and pelvis angle were computed for comparison between the two systems. To assess the error between systems, the root mean square difference (RMSD) was averaged across each gait cycle and statistical parametric mapping (SPM) paired t-tests were applied. The sagittal trunk angle had the lowest RMSD of 2.0° and elbow rotation had the highest RMSD of 19°, with the same values for walking and trotting. SPM indicated increased hip flexion (0–100 %, p < 0.001) and elbow flexion (24–47 %, p = 0.03; 63–100 %, p < 0.001) in the walking gait cycle for the markerless system. A lack of joint range of motion and obscured medial limbs during walking whilst mounted on horses may cause increased offsets for markerless data in equestrian riders. No significant differences were found for the transverse plane, yet there tended to be increased RMSD. This lack of consistency suggests results from the transverse plane in equestrian riders should be interpreted with caution. Study findings indicate that markerless technology has the potential to be a suitable alternative to marker-based systems for assessment of equestrian riders, dependent on the segment/joint angle of interest and the level of acceptable error. These results indicate that markerless systems can effectively be utilised for rider biofeedback, though their application may be limited for specific joint analyses.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of biomechanics
Journal of biomechanics 生物-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership. Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to: -Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells. -Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions. -Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response. -Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing. -Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine. -Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction. -Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules. -Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints. -Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics. -Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信