skip to main content
research-article

LAX-Score: Quantifying Team Performance in Lacrosse and Exploring IMU Features towards Performance Enhancement

Authors Info & Claims
Published:14 September 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

For the past several decades, machine learning has played an important role in sports science with regard to player performance and result prediction. However, it is still challenging to quantify team-level game performance because there is no strong ground truth. Thus, a team cannot receive feedback in a standardized way. The aim of this study was twofold. First, we designed a metric called LAX-Score to quantify a collegiate lacrosse team's athletic performance. Next, we explored the relationship between our proposed metric and practice sensing features for performance enhancement. To derive the metric, we utilized feature selection and weighted regression. Then, the proposed metric was statistically validated on over 700 games from the last three seasons of NCAA Division I women's lacrosse. We also explored our biometric sensing dataset obtained from a collegiate team's athletes over the course of a season. We then identified the practice features that are most correlated with high-performance games. Our results indicate that LAX-Score provides insight into athletic performance beyond wins and losses. Moreover, though COVID-19 has stalled implementation, the collegiate team studied applied our feature outcomes to their practices, and the initial results look promising with regard to better performance.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Nur Sakinah Diyanah Abdullah and Izzal Asnira Zolkepli. 2017. Sentiment Analysis of Online Crowd Input towards Brand Provocation in Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Proceedings of the International Conference on Big Data and Internet of Thing (BDIOT) (2017), 67--74. https://doi.org/10.1145/3175684.3175689Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Mahboubeh Ahmadalinezhad, Masoud Makrehchi, and Neil Seward. 2019. Basketball lineup performance prediction using network analysis. In ASONAM '19: International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 519--524. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341161.3342932Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Kei Akiyama, Takaya Sasaki, and Masahiro Mashiko. 2019. Elite Male Lacrosse Players' Match Activity Profile. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine 18, 2 (2019), 290--294. https://www.jssm.org/2jssm-18-290.xmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Alf Alderson. 2019. Making Rugby Safer | E&T Magazine.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Douglas G Altman and J Martin Bland. 2005. Standard deviations and standard errors. BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 331, 7521 (2005), 903. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.331.7521.903Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Jonathan D Bartlett, Fergus O'Connor, Nathan Pitchford, Lorena Torres-Ronda, and Samuel J Robertson. 2017. Relationships Between Internal and External Training Load in Team-Sport Athletes: Evidence for an Individualized Approach. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance 12, 2 (Feb. 2017), 230--234. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2015-0791Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Andres Mauricio Cifuentes Bernal, Robin Alfonzo Blanco Cañon, and Mauricio Plaza Torres. 2017. An Rn Surface to Describe Sport Performance in Women's Basketball Using Kohonen Nets on ECG Signals. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (ICCBB 2017). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 24--28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3155077.3155082Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Tim Op De Beéck, Arne Jaspers, Michel S. Brink, Wouter G.P. Frencken, Filip Staes, Jesse J. Davis, and Werner F. Helsen. 2019. Predicting Future Perceived Wellness in Professional Soccer: The Role of Preceding Load and Wellness. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance 14, 8 (Jan. 2019), 1--25. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2017-0864Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Bill Briggs. 2019. How machine learning is unlocking the secrets of human movement - and reshaping pro sports. https://news.microsoft.com/transform/machine-learning-unlocking-secrets-human-movement-reshaping-pro-sports/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Rory Bunker and Teo Susnjak. 2019. The Application of Machine Learning Techniques for Predicting Results in Team Sport: A Review. arXiv.org (Dec. 2019). arXiv:cs.LG/1912.11762v1 https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.11762Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. David L Carey, Kok-Leong Ong, Meg E Morris, Justin Crow, and Kay M Crossley. 2016. Predicting ratings of perceived exertion in Australian football players - methods for live estimation. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport 15, 2 (2016), 64--77. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijcss-2016-0005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. David L Carey, Kok-Leong Ong, R Whiteley, Kay M Crossley, Justin Crow, and Meg E Morris. 2017. Predictive Modelling of Training Loads and Injury in Australian Football. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport 17, 1 (June 2017), 49--66. https://doi.org/10.2478/ijcss-2018-0002Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Catapult.com. 2018. Catapult Technologies become FIFA-approved Wearable Tracking Devices. https://www.catapultsports.com/blog/fifa- approved-wearable-trackingGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Ryan M Chambers, Tim J Gabbett, Ritu Gupta, Casey Josman, Rhodri Bown, Paul Stridgeon, and Michael H Cole. 2019. Automatic detection of one-on-one tackles and ruck events using microtechnology in rugby union. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (Jan. 2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2019.01.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. João Gustavo Claudino, Daniel de Oliveira Capanema, Thiago Vieira de Souza, Julio Cerca Serrão, Adriano C. Machado Pereira, and George P. Nassis. 2019. Current approaches to the use of artificial intelligence for injury risk assessment and performance prediction in team sports: a systematic review. Sports Med - Open 5, 28 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-019-0202-3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Gabor Csataljay, Peter O'Donoghue, Mike Hughes, and Henriette Dancs. 2017. Performance indicators that distinguish winning and losing teams in basketball. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport 9, 1 (April 2017), 60--66. https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2009.11868464Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Paul Mallery Darren George. 2010. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 Update (10th. ed.). Allyn & Bacon.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Han Ding, Longfei Shangguan, Zheng Yang, Jinsong Han, Zimu Zhou, Panlong Yang, Wei Xi, and Jizhong Zhao. 2015. FEMO: A Platform for Free-weight Exercise Monitoring with RFIDs. SenSys '15: Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, 141--154. https://doi.org/10.1145/2809695.2809708Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Jordi Duch, Joshua S. Waitzman, and Luís A. Nunes Amaral. 2010. Quantifying the Performance of Individual Players in a Team Activity. PLoS ONE 5, 6 (June 2010), 1--7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010937Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Sharon R. Rana Emily A. Enemark-Miller, Jeff G. Seegmiller. 2009. Physiological profile of women's Lacrosse players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 23, 1 (2009), 39--43. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e318185f07cGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Peter C Fishburn. 1967. Additive utilities with incomplete product set: Applications to priorities and assignments. Operations Research 15, 3 (1967), 537--542. https://www.jstor.org/stable/168461Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Jordan L Fox, Robert Stanton, and Aaron T Scanlan. 2018. A Comparison of Training and Competition Demands in Semiprofessional Male Basketball Players. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 89, 1 (Jan. 2018), 103--111. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2017.1410693Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Charlie Francis. 1992. Charlie Francis Training System. TBLI Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Eibe Frank, Mark A. Hall, and Ian H. Witten. 2016. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. https://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Joel M Garrett, Ian McKeown, Darren J Burgess, Carl T Woods, and Roger G Eston. 2017. A preliminary investigation into the discriminant and ecological validity of the athletic ability assessment in elite Australian rules football:. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching 13, 5 (Oct. 2017), 679--686. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954117736168Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Jeremy Gentles, Christine Coniglio, Matthew Besemer, Joshua Morgan, and Michael Mahnken. 2018. The Demands of a Women's College Soccer Season. Sports 6, 1 (March 2018), 16--11. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6010016Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. S A Glantz, B K Slinker, and T B Neilands. 1990. Primer of Applied Regression and Analysis of Variance. McGraw-Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Brian Godsey. 2014. Comparing and Forecasting Performances in Different Events of Athletics Using a Probabilistic Model. arXiv.org 2 (Aug. 2014). arXiv:stat.AP/1408.5924v1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. E W Grafarend. 2006. Linear and nonlinear models: fixed effects, random effects, and mixed models.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Ben Greenfield. 2013. How Heart Rate Zones Work. https://bengreenfieldfitness.com/article/fitness-articles/how-heart-rate-zones-work/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Benjamin H Groh, Frank Warschun, Martin Deininger, Thomas Kautz, Christine Martindale, and Björn Eskofier. 2017. Automated Ski Velocity and Jump Length Determination in Ski Jumping Based on Unobtrusive and Wearable Sensors. IMWUT 1, 3 (2017), 1--17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3130918Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Mahmoud Hassan, Florian Daiber, Frederik Wiehr, Felix Kosmalla, and Antonio Krüger. 2017. FootStriker: An EMS-based Foot Strike Assistant for Running. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1, 1 (March 2017), 2--18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3053332Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Richard Hauer, Antonio Tessitore, Nicole Binder, and Harald Tschan. 2018. Physiological, perceptual, and technical responses to continuous and intermittent small-sided games in lacrosse players. PLoS ONE 13, 10 (Oct. 2018), e0203832-14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203832Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Jay R. Hoffman, Nicholas A. Ratamess, Kate L. Neese, Ryan E. Rose, Jie Kang, Jason F. Magrelli, and Avery D. Faigenbaum. 2019. Physical Performance Characteristics in NCAA Division III Champion Female Lacrosse Athletes. 23, 5 (Sept. 2019), 1524--1529. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b3391dGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. John Hollinger. 2005. Game Score. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_HollingerGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. John Hollinger. 2005. PER. https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. IBM. 2009. SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) Statistics. https://www.ibm.com/analytics/spss-statistics-softwareGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. MonkeyLearn Inc. 2013. MonkeyLearn - TextAnalysis. https://monkeylearn.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Sushma Jain and Harmandeep Kaur. 2017. Machine learning approaches to predict basketball game outcome. 2017 3rd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication & Automation (ICACCA) (Fall) (2017), 1--7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCAF.2017.8344688Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. B James. 1988. The Bill James historical baseball abstract. https://www.mlb.com/glossary/advanced-stats/game-scoreGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Arne Jaspers, Tim Op De Beéck, Michel S Brink, Wouter G P Frencken, Filip Staes, Jesse J Davis, and Werner F Helsen. 2018. Relationships Between the External and Internal Training Load in Professional Soccer: What Can We Learn From Machine Learning? International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance 13, 5 (May 2018), 625--630. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2017-0299Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Bob Kaleal. 2016. Heart Rate Training and the Science Behind its Success. https://www.ptonthenet.com/articles/heart-rate-training-and-the-science-behind-its-success-4053Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Stephen J Kelly, Mark L Watsford, Michael J Rennie, Rob W Spurrs, Damien Austin, and Matthew J Pine. 2019. Match-play movement and metabolic power demands of elite youth, sub-elite and elite senior Australian footballers. PLoS ONE 14, 2 (Feb. 2019), e0212047-10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212047Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Aftab Khan, James Nicholson, and Thomas Plötz. 2017. Activity Recognition for Quality Assessment of Batting Shots in Cricket using a Hierarchical Representation. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1, 3 (Sept. 2017), 1--31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3130927Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Bridgett Lynn Klemz. 2014. Lacrosse: Biomechanics, Injuries, Prevention and Rehabilitation. (April 2014), 1--63. http://purl.flvc.org/fgcu/fd/Klemz_fgcu_1743_10051Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Kyle D Peterson. 2018. Resting Heart Rate Variability Can Predict Track and Field Sprint Performance. OA Journal - Sports 1 (Sept. 2018), 1--9. https://doi.org/10.24294/sp.v1i1.159Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Cassim Ladha, Nils Y Hammerla, Patrick Olivier, and Thomas Plötz. 2013. ClimbAX - skill assessment for climbing enthusiasts. UbiComp '13: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing (2013), 235--244. https://doi.org/10.1145/2493432.2493492Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Yongjun Li, Lizheng Wang, and Feng Li. 2021. A data-driven prediction approach for sports team performance and its application to National Basketball Association. Omega 98 (2021), 102123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2019.102123Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Robert G Lockie, Samantha A Birmingham-Babauta, John J Stokes, Tricia M Liu, Fabrice G Risso, Adrina Lazar, Dominic V Giuliano, Ashley J Orjalo, Matthew R Moreno, Alyssa A Stage, and DeShaun L Davis. 2018. An Analysis of Collegiate Club-Sport Female Lacrosse Players: Sport-Specific Field Test Performance and the Influence of Lacrosse Stick Carrying. International Journal of Exercise Science 11, 4 (Jan. 2018), 269--280.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Cliff Mallett and Jean Côté. 2006. Beyond Winning and Losing: Guidelines for Evaluating High Performance Coaches. The Sport Psychologist 20, 2 (June 2006), 213--221. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.20.2.213Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Nazanin Mehrasa, Yatao Zhong, Frederick Tung, Luke Bornn, and Greg Mori. 2018. Deep learning of player trajectory representations for team activity analysis. 11th MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Iñigo Mujika. 2017. Quantification of training and competition loads in endurance sports: methods and applications. The International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (IJSPP) (2017). https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0403Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. NCAA. 2020. D1 Women's College Lacrosse. https://www.ncaa.com/sports/lacrosse-women/d1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Daniel P Nicolella, Lorena Torres-Ronda, Kase J Saylor, and Xavi Schelling. 2018. Validity and reliability of an accelerometer-based player tracking device. PLoS ONE 13, 2 (Feb. 2018), e0191823-13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191823Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Kyle D Peterson. 2018. Recurrent Neural Network to Forecast Sprint Performance. Applied Artificial Intelligence 32, 7--8 (Oct. 2018), 692--706. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2018.1505214Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Steven S. Plisk. 1994. Regression Analyses of NCAA Division I Final Four Men's Lacrosse Competition. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 8, 1 (Aug. 1994), 28--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Chris S. Polley, Stuart J. Cormack, Tim J. Gabbett, and Ted Polglaze. 2019. Activity Profile of High Level Australian Lacrosse. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 29, 1 (June 2019), 126--136. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000000599Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. JR Quinlan. 1986. Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning 1 (1986), 81--106. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00116251Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Alen Rajšp and Jr. Izdok Fister. 2020. A Systematic Literature Review of Intelligent Data Analysis Methods for Smart Sport Training. Applied Sciences 10, 9 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/app10093013Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. C L Rakshitha and S Gowrishankar. 2018. Machine Learning based Analysis of Twitter Data to Determine a Person's Mental Health Intuitive Wellbeing. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 13, 21 (2018). http://www.ripublication.com/ijaer18/ijaerv13n21_20.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Aaron M Randolph. 2012. Analysis of the Effectiveness of a Preseason Strength and Conditioning Program for Collegiate Men's and Women's Lacrosse. (Dec. 2012), 1--208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Samuel Ryan, Aaron J Coutts, Joel Hocking, and Thomas Kempton. 2017. Factors Affecting Match Running Performance in Professional Australian Football. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance 12, 9 (Oct. 2017), 1199--1204. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0586Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Patrick Schober, Christa Boer, and Lothar A Schwarte. 2018. Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation. Anesth Analg. 126, 5 (2018), 1763--1768. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Steven R Schultze and Christian-Mathias Wellbrock. 2018. A weighted plus/minus metric for individual soccer player performance. Journal of Sports Analytics 4, 2 (March 2018), 121--131. https://doi.org/10.3233/JSA-170225Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Katie M. Sell, James M. Prnedergast, Jamie J. Ghigiarelli, Adam M. Gonzalez, Lauren M. Biscardi, Adam R. Jajtner, and Alexander S. Rothstein. 2018. Comparison of Physical Fitness Parameters For Starters vs. Nonstarters in an NCAA DIVISION I MEN's Lacrosse Team. 32, 11 (Nov. 2018), 3160--3168. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002830Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Shweta Srivastava. 2014. Weka: a tool for data preprocessing, classification, ensemble, clustering and association rule mining. International Journal of Computer Applications 88, 10 (2014). https://doi.org/10.5120/15389-3809Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  67. Michelle R. Steinhagen, Michael C. Meyers, Howard H. Erickson, Larry Noble, and Melanie T. Richardson. 1998. Physiological Profile of College Club Sport Lacrosse Athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 12, 4 (Aug. 1998), 226--231. https://doi.org/10.1519/00124278-199811000-00004Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Jason D Vescovi, Todd D Brown, and Teena M Murray. 2007. Descriptive characteristics of NCAA Division I women lacrosse players. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 10, 5 (Oct. 2007), 334--340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2006.07.010Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Heather K Vincent, Laura Ann Zdziarski, and Kevin R Vincent. 2015. Review of Lacrosse-Related Musculoskeletal Injuries in High School and Collegiate Players. Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach 7, 5 (Aug. 2015), 448--451. https://doi.org/10.1177/1941738114552990Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Zhengkui Wang, Guangdong Bai, Soumyadeb Chowdhury, Quanqing Xu, and Zhi Lin Seow. 2017. TwiInsight: Discovering Topics and Sentiments from Social Media Datasets. arXiv.org (May 2017). arXiv:cs.IR/1705.08094v1 http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08094v1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Aaron Wellman, Sam Coad, Grant Goulet, and Christopher McLellan. 2016. Quantification of competitive game demands of NCAA division I college football players using global positioning systems. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 30, 1 (2016), 11--19. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001206Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Wikipedia. 2004. Rating percentage index - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rating_percentage_indexGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Wikipedia. 2005. Winning Percentage - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winning_percentageGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Wikipedia. 2014. Grading systems by country - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grading_systems_by_countryGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Ian H. Witten, Eibe Frank, Leonard E. Trigg, Mark A. Hall, Geoffrey Holmes, and Sally Jo Cunningham. 1999. Weka: Practical machine learning tools and techniques with Java implementations. Hamilton, New Zealand: University of Waikato, Department of Computer Science (Nov. 1999).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Daniel WT Wundersitz, Casey Josmanand Ritu Gupta, Kevin J Netto, Paul B Gastin, and Sam Robertson. 2015. Classification of team sport activities using a single wearable tracking device. Journal of Biomechanics 48, 15 (2015), 3975--3981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.09.015Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  77. Shuai Zhang, Lina Yao, Aixin Sun, and Yi Tay. 2019. Deep Learning Based Recommender System - A Survey and New Perspectives. ACM Comput. Surv. 52, 1 (2019), 1--38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3285029Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Hongyang Zhao, Shuangquan Wang, Gang Zhou, and Woosub Jung. 2019. TennisEye - tennis ball speed estimation using a racket-mounted motion sensor. IPSN (2019), 241--252. https://doi.org/10.1145/3302506.3310404Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. LAX-Score: Quantifying Team Performance in Lacrosse and Exploring IMU Features towards Performance Enhancement

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
      Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies  Volume 5, Issue 3
      Sept 2021
      1443 pages
      EISSN:2474-9567
      DOI:10.1145/3486621
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 14 September 2021
      Published in imwut Volume 5, Issue 3

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader