Evaluates fundamental taekwondo kicks in university students, suggesting a novel smartphone-based assessment method.
Accessible and quantitative assessment of rapid martial arts movements remains difficult without specialized equipment or continuous expert observation. Here, we present a desktop prototype that uses smartphone-recorded videos to recognize and evaluate three fundamental taekwondo kicks: front, roundhouse and axe kicks. The TKD-Kick3 protocol planned 790 recordings from 150 university students across five physical education classes and retained 765 cleaned pose sequences; because two first-year classes had not yet learned the roundhouse kick, front and axe kick recordings were planned for all students, whereas roundhouse kick recordings were planned only for 95 second-year students. MediaPipe Pose extracted 13 body keypoints, which were encoded as 52-dimensional frame features combining normalized two-dimensional positions and first-order velocities. Because participant identifiers were unavailable, recognition was assessed using a file-level validation split; recordings from the same participant may therefore have crossed subsets, potentially inflating performance estimates. Across three random seeds, the selected BiLSTM with uniform resampling and argmax inference achieved 75.3 ± 2.3% accuracy, 74.3 ± 2.3% macro-F1 and 74.5 ± 2.3% balanced accuracy; within the same validation setting, the best Transformer configuration achieved 67.3 ± 1.7% accuracy. On 30 expert-annotated videos, system scores showed moderate association with expert ratings (Spearman’s rho = 0.627; mean absolute error = 0.601 on a 10-point scale), providing preliminary support for the interpretable scoring approach. These results provide proof-of-concept evidence for smartphone-based kick assessment but do not establish participant-independent generalization or expert-equivalent scoring, motivating future evaluation with participant-level metadata and independent test cohorts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: