↓ Skip to main content

A New Training Assessment Method for Alpine Ski Racing: Estimating Center of Mass Trajectory by Fusing Inertial Sensors With Periodically Available Position Anchor Points

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A New Training Assessment Method for Alpine Ski Racing: Estimating Center of Mass Trajectory by Fusing Inertial Sensors With Periodically Available Position Anchor Points
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.01203
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benedikt Fasel, Matthias Gilgien, Jörg Spörri, Kamiar Aminian

Abstract

In this study we present and validate a method to correct velocity and position drift for inertial sensor-based measurements in the context of alpine ski racing. Magnets were placed at each gate and their position determined using a land surveying method. The time point of gate crossings of the athlete were detected with a magnetometer attached to the athlete's lower back. A full body inertial sensor setup allowed to track the athlete's posture, and the magnet positions were used as anchor points to correct position and velocity drift from the integration of the acceleration. Center of mass (CoM) position errors (mean ± standard deviation) were 0.24 m ± 0.09 m and CoM velocity errors were 0.00 m/s ± 0.18 m/s. For extracted turn entrance and exit speeds the 95% limits of agreements (LoAs) were between -0.19 and 0.33 m/s. LoA for the total path length of a turn were between -0.06 and 0.16 m. The proposed setup and processing allowed estimating the CoM kinematics with similar errors than known for differential global navigation satellite systems (GNSS), even though the athlete's movement was measured with inertial and magnetic sensors only. Moreover, as the gate positions can also be obtained with non-GNSS based land surveying methods, CoM kinematics may be estimated in areas with reduced or no GNSS signal reception, such as in forests or indoors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 16 55%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 6 21%
Engineering 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 18 62%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,423,597
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#5,369
of 13,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,914
of 334,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#227
of 473 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,790 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 473 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.