Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Automatic Error Analysis of Human Motor Performance for Interactive Coaching in Virtual Reality

Artificial Intelligence · Submitted 26 Sep 2017

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We compare our algorithm to a well established state-of-the-art approach in time series classification, 1-Nearest Neighbor combined with Dynamic Time Warping, and show our algorithm's superiority regarding classification quality as well as computational cost.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1709.09131 (version 1)
Pith IDDQF7JCHX, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationFelix H\"ulsmann, Mario Botsch, Stefan Kopp. "Automatic Error Analysis of Human Motor Performance for Interactive Coaching in Virtual Reality." arXiv:1709.09131 (2017). https://pith.science/paper/DQF7JCHX
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 6,961 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.10 · states limitation 0.09 · human participants 0.81 · controlled comparison 0.64 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.05 · compares with prior results 0.98 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

In the context of fitness coaching or for rehabilitation purposes, the motor actions of a human participant must be observed and analyzed for errors in order to provide effective feedback. This task is normally carried out by human coaches, and it needs to be solved automatically in technical applications that are to provide automatic coaching (e.g. training environments in VR). However, most coaching systems only provide coarse information on movement quality, such as a scalar value per body part that describes the overall deviation from the correct movement. Further, they are often limited to static body postures or rather simple movements of single body parts. While there are many approaches to distinguish between different types of movements (e.g., between walking and jumping), the detection of more subtle errors in a motor performance is less investigated. We propose a novel approach to classify errors in sports or rehabilitation exercises such that feedback can be delivered in a rapid and detailed manner: Homogeneous sub-sequences of exercises are first temporally aligned via Dynamic Time Warping. Next, we extract a feature vector from the aligned sequences, which serves as a basis for feature selection using Random Forests. The selected features are used as input for Support Vector Machines, which finally classify the movement errors. We compare our algorithm to a well established state-of-the-art approach in time series classification, 1-Nearest Neighbor combined with Dynamic Time Warping, and show our algorithm's superiority regarding classification quality as well as computational cost.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 In the context of fitness coaching or for rehabilitation purposes, the motor actions of a human participant must be observed and analyzed for errors in order to provide effective feedback. background 1.00 0.04 0.02 asserted 0.99
s1 This task is normally carried out by human coaches, and it needs to be solved automatically in technical applications that are to provide automatic coaching (e.g. training environments in VR). background 0.94 0.05 0.03 asserted 1.00
s2 However, most coaching systems only provide coarse information on movement quality, such as a scalar value per body part that describes the overall deviation from the correct movement. gap 0.71 0.05 0.02 asserted 0.96
s3 Further, they are often limited to static body postures or rather simple movements of single body parts. gap 0.66 0.04 0.02 asserted 0.83
s4 While there are many approaches to distinguish between different types of movements (e.g., between walking and jumping), the detection of more subtle errors in a motor performance is less investigated. gap 0.99 0.04 0.02 asserted 0.98
s5 We propose a novel approach to classify errors in sports or rehabilitation exercises such that feedback can be delivered in a rapid and detailed manner: Homogeneous sub-sequences of exercises are first temporally aligned via Dynamic Time Warping. contribution 0.91 0.83 0.15 asserted 0.95
s6 Next, we extract a feature vector from the aligned sequences, which serves as a basis for feature selection using Random Forests. method 1.00 0.93 0.03 asserted 0.99
s7 The selected features are used as input for Support Vector Machines, which finally classify the movement errors. method 1.00 0.83 0.06 asserted 0.97
s8 We compare our algorithm to a well established state-of-the-art approach in time series classification, 1-Nearest Neighbor combined with Dynamic Time Warping, and show our algorithm's superiority regarding classification quality as well as computational cost. result 0.99 0.96 0.78 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 0.60.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

In the context of fitness coaching or for rehabilitation purposes, the motor actions of a human participant must be observed and analyzed for errors in order to provide effective feedback. This task is normally carried out by human coaches, and it needs to be solved automatically in technical applications that are to provide automatic coaching (e.g. training environments in VR). However, most coaching systems only provide coarse information on movement quality, such as a scalar value per body part that describes the overall deviation from the correct movement. Further, they are often limited to static body postures or rather simple movements of single body parts. While there are many approaches to distinguish between different types of movements (e.g., between walking and jumping), the detection of more subtle errors in a motor performance is less investigated. We propose a novel approach to classify errors in sports or rehabilitation exercises such that feedback can be delivered in a rapid and detailed manner: Homogeneous sub-sequences of exercises are first temporally aligned via Dynamic Time Warping. Next, we extract a feature vector from the aligned sequences, which serves as a basis for feature selection using Random Forests. The selected features are used as input for Support Vector Machines, which finally classify the movement errors. We compare our algorithm to a well established state-of-the-art approach in time series classification, 1-Nearest Neighbor combined with Dynamic Time Warping, and show our algorithm's superiority regarding classification quality as well as computational cost.

Human review
How the literature uses it

What this paper does with the arXiv papers it cites

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.