ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Effects of Different Marker Set Configurations on Tennis Stroke Recognition Performance: A Three-Dimensional Kinematic Study Based on MiniRocket.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional motion capture provides high-fidelity kinematic trajectories, but the extent to which different marker configurations retain discriminative information for tennis stroke recognition remains unclear. This study combined 3D motion capture with MiniRocket to compare seven upper-limb and racket marker configurations using data from 40 tennis-trained participants, 13 stroke types, and 10,133 valid movement samples. The configurations were the full-information group (ALL), full-arm group (AB), forearm group (FA), forearm + racket group (FR), upper-arm group (UA), racket group (RK), and watch group (WT). Model performance was evaluated using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. All configurations achieved high performance in the three-class task. In the 13-class task, Macro-F1 was highest for ALL (78.76%), followed closely by FR (78.71%) and RK (78.28%). Holm-adjusted pairwise comparisons showed no significant differences among ALL, FR, and RK. FR significantly outperformed AB, FA, UA, and WT, whereas RK significantly outperformed FA, UA, and WT. Serve and overhead strokes were easiest to recognize, while several fine-grained baseline and net-play strokes showed lower F1-scores. These findings indicate that discriminative information is more strongly represented in the forearm-wrist-racket chain rather than simply increasing with marker count.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.