Yulin Zhou , Shengxing Fu , Tianqi Yao , Hui Liu , Hanjun Li
{"title":"Artificial neural networks’ estimations of lower-limb kinetics in sidestepping: Comparison of full-body vs. lower-body landmark sets","authors":"Yulin Zhou , Shengxing Fu , Tianqi Yao , Hui Liu , Hanjun Li","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Artificial neural networks (ANNs) offers potential for obtaining kinetics in non-laboratory. This study compared the estimation performance for ground reaction forces (GRF) and lower-limb joint moments during sidestepping between ANNs fed with full-body and lower-body landmarks. 71 male college soccer athletes executed sidestepping while three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics were collected to calculate joint moments by inverse dynamic. To estimate GRF and lower-limb joint moments, coordinates of 18 full-body (the full-body landmarks ANN) and 11 lower-limb body landmarks (the lower-body landmarks ANN) were respectively used as inputs in ANNs. Estimation performance was evaluated using the coefficient of multiple correlations, root mean square error (RMSE), and normalized RMSE (nRMSE) between estimated and measured results. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test determined the difference in estimation performance between the two types of ANNs. Statistical parametric mapping determined the difference between the estimated and measured curves. The lower-body landmarks ANN showed lower error for sagittal knee moments (RMSE: p < 0.001; nRMSE: p < 0.001), but higher error for sagittal hip (RMSE: p = 0.015) and ankle moments (RMSE: p = 0.001; nRMSE: p = 0.001). Significant differences between the lower-body landmarks ANN estimates and measurement curves were found in anterior-posterior GRF (10–12 %, p = 0.013), vertical GRF (5–15 %, p < 0.001), and hip transverse moment (1 %, p = 0.017). No significant differences were found in the estimated and measured GRF peaks. The ANN only using lower-body landmarks as inputs could accurately estimate GRF and lower-limb joint moments during sidestepping, with better performance for knee moments, while ANN using full-body landmarks performs better for hip and ankle moments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 112548"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025000594","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Artificial neural networks (ANNs) offers potential for obtaining kinetics in non-laboratory. This study compared the estimation performance for ground reaction forces (GRF) and lower-limb joint moments during sidestepping between ANNs fed with full-body and lower-body landmarks. 71 male college soccer athletes executed sidestepping while three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics were collected to calculate joint moments by inverse dynamic. To estimate GRF and lower-limb joint moments, coordinates of 18 full-body (the full-body landmarks ANN) and 11 lower-limb body landmarks (the lower-body landmarks ANN) were respectively used as inputs in ANNs. Estimation performance was evaluated using the coefficient of multiple correlations, root mean square error (RMSE), and normalized RMSE (nRMSE) between estimated and measured results. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test determined the difference in estimation performance between the two types of ANNs. Statistical parametric mapping determined the difference between the estimated and measured curves. The lower-body landmarks ANN showed lower error for sagittal knee moments (RMSE: p < 0.001; nRMSE: p < 0.001), but higher error for sagittal hip (RMSE: p = 0.015) and ankle moments (RMSE: p = 0.001; nRMSE: p = 0.001). Significant differences between the lower-body landmarks ANN estimates and measurement curves were found in anterior-posterior GRF (10–12 %, p = 0.013), vertical GRF (5–15 %, p < 0.001), and hip transverse moment (1 %, p = 0.017). No significant differences were found in the estimated and measured GRF peaks. The ANN only using lower-body landmarks as inputs could accurately estimate GRF and lower-limb joint moments during sidestepping, with better performance for knee moments, while ANN using full-body landmarks performs better for hip and ankle moments.
人工神经网络(ANNs)提供了在非实验室条件下获得动力学的潜力。本研究比较了采用全身和下半身标志的人工神经网络在回避过程中对地面反作用力(GRF)和下肢关节力矩的估计性能。以71名男大学生足球运动员为研究对象,收集其三维运动学和动力学数据,采用逆动力学方法计算关节力矩。为了估计GRF和下肢关节力矩,分别使用18个全身(全身标志神经网络)和11个下肢身体标志神经网络(下肢标志神经网络)的坐标作为神经网络的输入。使用估计结果和测量结果之间的多重相关系数、均方根误差(RMSE)和归一化RMSE (nRMSE)来评估估计性能。Wilcoxon符号秩检验确定了两种类型的人工神经网络在估计性能上的差异。统计参数映射确定了估计曲线和测量曲线之间的差异。下体标志神经网络对矢状膝关节时刻的误差较小(RMSE: p
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.