Comparison of lower limb kinematic and kinetic estimation during athlete jumping between markerless and marker-based motion capture systems

Markerless motion capture (ML) systems, which utilize deep learning algorithms, have significantly expanded the applications of biomechanical analysis. Jump tests are now essential tools for athlete monitoring and injury prevention. However, the validity of kinematic and kinetic parameters derived from ML for lower limb joints requires further validation in populations engaged in high-intensity jumping sports. The purpose of this study was to compare lower limb kinematic and kinetic estimates between marker-based (MB) and ML motion capture systems during jumps. Fourteen male Division I movement collegiate athletes performed a minimum of three squat jumps (SJ), drop jumps (DJ), and countermovement jumps (CMJ) in a fixed sequence. The movements were synchronized using ten infrared cameras, six high-resolution cameras, and two force measurement platforms, all controlled by Vicon Nexus software. Motion data were collected, and the angles, moments, and power at the hip, knee, and ankle joints were calculated using Theia3D software. These results were then compared with those obtained from the Vicon system. Comparative analyses included Pearson correlation coefficients (r), root mean square differences (RMSD), extreme error values, and statistical parametric mapping (SPM).SPM analysis of the three movements in the sagittal plane revealed significant differences in hip joint angles, with joint angle RMSD ≤ 5.6°, hip joint moments RMSD ≤ 0.26 N·M/kg, and power RMSD ≤ 2.12 W/kg showing considerable variation, though not reaching statistical significance. ML systems demonstrate high measurement accuracy in estimating knee and ankle kinematics and kinetics in the sagittal plane during these conventional jump tests; however, the accuracy of hip joint kinematic measurements in the sagittal plane requires further validation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-05-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-02739-9
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Human Pose and Action Recognition
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.10

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of lower limb kinematic and kinetic estimation during athlete jumping between markerless and marker-based motion capture systems

Xi Huang, Zhe Hu, Lili Tu, Xiaolong Li et al.
4 citations
Scientific Reports
Human Pose and Action Recognition
5.10
article

Comparison of lower limb kinematic and kinetic estimation during athlete jumping between markerless and marker-based motion capture systems

Xi Huang, Zhe Hu, Lili Tu, Xiaolong Li, Changzhi Yang, Li-Chung Wei, Yanjia Xu
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Markerless motion capture (ML) systems, which utilize deep learning algorithms, have significantly expanded the applications of biomechanical analysis. Jump tests are now essential tools for athlete monitoring and injury prevention. However, the validity of kinematic and kinetic parameters derived from ML for lower limb joints requires further validation in populations engaged in high-intensity jumping sports. The purpose of this study was to compare lower limb kinematic and kinetic estimates between marker-based (MB) and ML motion capture systems during jumps. Fourteen male Division I movement collegiate athletes performed a minimum of three squat jumps (SJ), drop jumps (DJ), and countermovement jumps (CMJ) in a fixed sequence. The movements were synchronized using ten infrared cameras, six high-resolution cameras, and two force measurement platforms, all controlled by Vicon Nexus software. Motion data were collected, and the angles, moments, and power at the hip, knee, and ankle joints were calculated using Theia3D software. These results were then compared with those obtained from the Vicon system. Comparative analyses included Pearson correlation coefficients (r), root mean square differences (RMSD), extreme error values, and statistical parametric mapping (SPM).SPM analysis of the three movements in the sagittal plane revealed significant differences in hip joint angles, with joint angle RMSD ≤ 5.6°, hip joint moments RMSD ≤ 0.26 N·M/kg, and power RMSD ≤ 2.12 W/kg showing considerable variation, though not reaching statistical significance. ML systems demonstrate high measurement accuracy in estimating knee and ankle kinematics and kinetics in the sagittal plane during these conventional jump tests; however, the accuracy of hip joint kinematic measurements in the sagittal plane requires further validation.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Jeonju National University of Education (KR), Southwest Medical University (CN), Shandong Sport University (CN), Hainan Medical University (CN), Jeonbuk National University (KR)
Jeonbuk National University
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Human Pose and Action Recognition
5.10
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.