Advertisement

The Classification of Skateboarding Trick Manoeuvres: A K-Nearest Neighbour Approach

  • Muhammad Ar Rahim Ibrahim
  • Muhammad Amirul Abdullah
  • Muhammad Nur Aiman Shapiee
  • Mohd Azraai Mohd Razman
  • Rabiu Muazu Musa
  • Muhammad Aizzat Zakaria
  • Noor Azuan Abu Osman
  • Anwar P. P. Abdul MajeedEmail author
Conference paper
  • 25 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Bioengineering book series (LNBE)

Abstract

The evaluation of skateboarding tricks is commonly carried out subjectively through the prior experience of the panel of judges during skateboarding competitions. Hence, this technique evaluation is often impartial to a certain degree. This study aims at classifying flat ground tricks namely Ollie, Kickflip, Shove-it, Nollie and Frontside 180 through the use of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) and a class of machine learning model namely k-Nearest Neighbour (k-NN). An amateur skateboarder (23 years of age ± 5.0 years’ experience) executed five tricks for each type of trick repeatedly on a customized ORY skateboard (IMU sensor fused) on a cemented ground. A number of features were extracted and engineered from the IMU data, i.e., mean, skewness, kurtosis, peak to peak, root mean square as well as standard deviation of the acceleration and angular velocities along the primary axes. A variation of k-NN algorithms were tested based on the number of neighbours, as well as the weight and the type of distance metric used. It was shown from the present preliminary investigation, that the k-NN model which employs k = 1 with an equal weight applied to the Euclidean distance metric yielded a classification accuracy of 85%. Therefore, it could be concluded that the proposed method is able to classify the skateboard tricks reasonably well and will in turn, assist the judges in providing more accurate evaluation of the tricks as opposed to the conventional-subjective based assessment that is applied at present.

Keywords

Skateboarding tricks Machine learning K-Nearest Neighbour IMU sensor 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge Universiti Malaysia Pahang and the Ministry of Education Malaysia for supporting this study (FRGS/1/2019/TK03/UMP/02/6 & RDU1901115).

References

  1. 1.
    Corrêa, N.K., de Lima, J.C.M., Russomano, T., dos Santos, M.A.: Development of a skateboarding trick classifier using accelerometry and machine learning. Res. Biomed. Eng. 33, 362–369 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Groh, B.H., Fleckenstein, M., Kautz, T., Eskofier, B.M.: Classification and visualization of skateboard tricks using wearable sensors. Pervasive Mob. Comput. 40, 42–55 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Groh, B.H., Kautz, T., Schuldhaus, D., Eskofier, B.M.: IMU-based trick classification in skateboarding. In: KDD Workshop on Large-Scale Sports Analytics, p. 17 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Groh, B.H., Fleckenstein, M., Eskofier, B.M.: Wearable trick classification in freestyle snowboarding. In: 2016 IEEE 13th International Conference on Wearable and Implantable Body Sensor Networks (BSN), pp. 89–93. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brock, H., Ohgi, Y.: Assessing motion style errors in Ski jumping using inertial sensor devices. IEEE Sens. J. 17, 3794–3804 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2017.2699162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang, Y., Chen, M., Wang, X., Chan, R.H.M., Li, W.J.: IoT for next-generation racket sports training. IEEE Internet Things J. 5, 4558–4566 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gellaerts, J., Bogdanov, E., Dadashi, F., Mariani, B.: In-field validation of an inertial sensor-based system for movement analysis and classification in Ski mountaineering. Sensors 18, 885 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kos, M., Kramberger, I.: Tennis stroke consistency analysis using miniature wearable IMU. In: 2018 25th International Conference on Systems, Signals and Image Processing (IWSSIP), pp. 1–4. IEEE (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McGrath, J.W., Neville, J., Stewart, T., Cronin, J.: Cricket fast bowling detection in a training setting using an inertial measurement unit and machine learning. J. Sports Sci. 37, 1220–1226 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahamed, N.U., Kobsar, D., Benson, L., Clermont, C., Kohrs, R., Osis, S.T., Ferber, R.: Using wearable sensors to classify subject-specific running biomechanical gait patterns based on changes in environmental weather conditions. PLoS ONE 13, e0203839 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Worsey, M.T.O., Espinosa, H.G., Shepherd, J.B., Thiel, D.V.: Inertial sensors for performance analysis in combat sports: a systematic review. Sports 7, 28 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Musa, R.M., Majeed, A.P.P.A., Taha, Z., Chang, S.W., Nasir, A.F.A., Abdullah, M.R.: A machine learning approach of predicting high potential archers by means of physical fitness indicators. PLoS ONE 14, e0209638 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Ar Rahim Ibrahim
    • 1
  • Muhammad Amirul Abdullah
    • 1
  • Muhammad Nur Aiman Shapiee
    • 1
  • Mohd Azraai Mohd Razman
    • 1
  • Rabiu Muazu Musa
    • 1
    • 2
  • Muhammad Aizzat Zakaria
    • 1
  • Noor Azuan Abu Osman
    • 2
  • Anwar P. P. Abdul Majeed
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Innovative Manufacturing, Mechatronics and Sports LaboratoryUniversiti Malaysia PahangPekanMalaysia
  2. 2.Universiti Malaysia TerengganuKuala TerengganuMalaysia

Personalised recommendations