Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery

, Volume 31, Issue 6, pp 1706–1734 | Cite as

Classification and legality analysis of bowling action in the game of cricket

Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Sports Analytics

Abstract

One of the hot topics in modern era of cricket is to decide whether the bowling action of a bowler is legal or not. Because of the complex bio-mechanical movement of the bowling arm, it is not possible for the on-field umpire to declare a bowling action as legal or illegal. Inertial sensors are currently being used for activity recognition in cricket for the coaching of bowlers and detecting the legality of their moves, since a well trained and legal bowling action is highly significant for the career of a cricket player. After extensive analysis and research, we present a system to detect the legality of the bowling action based on real time multidimensional physiological data obtained from the inertial sensors mounted on the bowlers arm. We propose a method to examine the movement of the bowling arm in the correct rotation order with a precise angle. The system evaluates the bowling action using various action profiles. The action profiles are used so as to simplify the complex bio-mechanical movement of the bowling arm along with minimizing the size of the data provided to the classifier. The events of interest are identified and tagged. Algorithms such as support vector machines, k-nearest neighbor, Naïve Bayes, random forest, and artificial neural network are trained over statistical features extracted from the tagged data. To accomplish the reliability of outcome measures, the technical error of measurement was adopted. The proposed method achieves very high accuracy in the correct classification of bowling action.

Keywords

Chucking Cricket Activity recognition Machine learning Feature extraction Inertial sensors Classification 

References

  1. Aginsky KD, Noakes TD (2010) Why it is difficult to detect an illegally bowled cricket delivery with either the naked eye or usual two-dimensional video analysis. Br J Sports Med 44(6):420–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmed A, Asawal M, Khan MJ, Cheema HM (2015) A wearable wireless sensor for real time validation of bowling action in cricket. In: IEEE 12th international conference on wearable and implantable body sensor networks (BSN), 2015. IEEE, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  3. Akay M (2011) Intelligent wearable monitor systems and methods. US Patent 7,981,058Google Scholar
  4. Altun K, Barshan B, Tunçel O (2010) Comparative study on classifying human activities with miniature inertial and magnetic sensors. Pattern Recognit 43(10):3605–3620CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Anguita D, Ghio A, Oneto L, Parra X, Reyes-Ortiz JL (2012) Human activity recognition on smartphones using a multiclass hardware-friendly support vector machine. In: Ambient assisted living and home care. Springer, pp 216–223Google Scholar
  6. Ayu MA, Ismail SA, Matin AFA, Mantoro T (2012) A comparison study of classifier algorithms for mobile-phone’s accelerometer based activity recognition. Procedia Eng 41:224–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bashir S, Qamar U, Khan FH (2015) Bagmoov: a novel ensemble for heart disease prediction bootstrap aggregation with multi-objective optimized voting. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 38:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bedogni L, Di Felice M, Bononi L (2012) By train or by car? detecting the user’s motion type through smartphone sensors data. In: IFIP wireless days (WD), 2012. IEEE, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  9. Casale P, Pujol O, Radeva P (2011) Human activity recognition from accelerometer data using a wearable device. In: pattern recognition and image analysis. Springer, pp 289–296Google Scholar
  10. Chin A, Lloyd D, Alderson J, Elliott B, Mills P (2010) A marker-based mean finite helical axis model to determine elbow rotation axes and kinematics in vivo. J Appl Biomech 26:305–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cortes C, Vapnik V (1995) Support-vector networks. Mach Learn 20(3):273–297MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Dash M, Liu H (2003) Consistency-based search in feature selection. Artif Intell 151(1):155–176MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Frew E, McGee T, Kim Z, Xiao X, Jackson S, Morimoto M, Rathinam S, Padial J, Sengupta R (2004) Vision-based road-following using a small autonomous aircraft. In: IEEE aerospace conference proceedings, 2004, vol 5. IEEE, pp 3006–3015Google Scholar
  14. Garcia-Ceja E, Brena R (2013) Long-term activity recognition from accelerometer data. Procedia Technol 7:248–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ghasemzadeh H, Jafari R (2011) Coordination analysis of human movements with body sensor networks: a signal processing model to evaluate baseball swings. IEEE Sens J 11(3):603–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ghasemzadeh H, Loseu V, Jafari R (2010) Collaborative signal processing for action recognition in body sensor networks: a distributed classification algorithm using motion transcripts. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM/IEEE international conference on information processing in sensor networks. ACM, pp 244–255Google Scholar
  17. Hall MA, Smith LA (1998) Practical feature subset selection for machine learning. In: 21st Australasian computer science conference, ACSC, 1998. Springer, pp 181–191Google Scholar
  18. Hofmann-Wellenhof B, Lichtenegger H, Wasle E (2007) GNSS—global navigation satellite systems: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, and more. Springer-Verlag, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson G, Waid J, Primm M, Aggerwal R (2012) Ship attitude accuracy trade study for aircraft approach and landing operations. In: IEEE/ION position location and navigation symposium (PLANS), 2012. IEEE, pp 783–790Google Scholar
  20. Mannini A, Sabatini AM (2010) Machine learning methods for classifying human physical activity from on-body accelerometers. Sensors 10(2):1154–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mannini A, Sabatini AM (2011) On-line classification of human activity and estimation of walk-run speed from acceleration data using support vector machines. In: Annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, EMBC, 2011. IEEE, pp 3302–3305Google Scholar
  22. Middleton KJ, Alderson JA, Elliott BC, Mills PM (2015) The influence of elbow joint kinematics on wrist speed in cricket fast bowling. J Sports Sci 33(15):1622–1631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miguel-Etayo D, Mesana M, Cardon G, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Góźdź M, Socha P, Lateva M, Iotova V, Koletzko B, Duvinage K et al (2014) Reliability of anthropometric measurements in european preschool children: the toybox-study. Obes Rev 15(S3):67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nadeau C, Bengio Y (2003) Inference for the generalization error. Mach Learn 52(3):239–281CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Niu X, Zhang Q, Li Y, Cheng Y, Shi C (2012) Using inertial sensors of iphone 4 for car navigation. In: IEEE/ION position location and navigation symposium (PLANS), 2012. IEEE, pp 555–561Google Scholar
  26. Perini TA, Oliveira GLd, Ornellas JdS, Oliveira FPd (2005) Technical error of measurement in anthropometry. Rev Bras Med Esporte 11(1):81–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Preece SJ, Goulermas JY, Kenney LP, Howard D (2009) A comparison of feature extraction methods for the classification of dynamic activities from accelerometer data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 56(3):871–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Qaisar S, Imtiaz S, Glazier P, Farooq F, Jamal A, Iqbal W, Lee S (2013) A method for cricket bowling action classification and analysis using a system of inertial sensors. In: Computational science and its applications—ICCSA 2013. Springer, pp 396–412Google Scholar
  29. Rousseeuw PJ, Hubert M (2011) Robust statistics for outlier detection. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Data Min Knowl Discov 1(1):73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Spratford W, Portus M, Wixted A, Leadbetter R, James DA (2015) Peak outward acceleration and ball release in cricket. J Sports Sci 33(7):754–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Titterton D, Weston JL (2004) Strapdown inertial navigation technology, vol 17. IETGoogle Scholar
  32. Uiterwaal M, Glerum E, Busser H, Van Lummel R (1998) Ambulatory monitoring of physical activity in working situations, a validation study. J Med Eng Technol 22(4):168–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang J, Chen R, Sun X, She MF, Wu Y (2011) Recognizing human daily activities from accelerometer signal. Procedia Eng 15:1780–1786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weaver BL, Theiss SK, Gorrell EM, Hagen KL, Bartol JJ, Brigham SE, Hill AL, Jennifer RY, Free MB (2011) Apparatus and method for processing data collected via wireless network sensors. US Patent 7,990,262Google Scholar
  35. Williams N, Zander S, Armitage G (2006) A preliminary performance comparison of five machine learning algorithms for practical ip traffic flow classification. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 36(5):5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wixted A, James D, Portus M (2011) Inertial sensor orientation for cricket bowling monitoring. In: IEEE sensors, 2011. IEEE, pp 1835–1838Google Scholar
  37. Wixted A, Portus M, Spratford W, James D (2011) Detection of throwing in cricket using wearable sensors. Sports Technol 4(3–4):134–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wixted A, Spratford W, Davis M, Portus M, James D (2010) Wearable sensors for on field near real time detection of illegal bowling actions. In: 1 of 1-conference of science, medicine and coaching in cricket 2010, p 165Google Scholar
  39. Wu AD, Johnson EN, Kaess M, Dellaert F, Chowdhary G (2013) Autonomous flight in gps-denied environments using monocular vision and inertial sensors. J Aerosp Inf Syst 10(4):172–186Google Scholar
  40. Yeadon MR, King MA (2015) The effect of marker placement around the elbow on calculated elbow extension during bowling in cricket. J Sports Sci 33(16):1658–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Salman
    • 1
  • Saad Qaisar
    • 1
  • Ali Mustafa Qamar
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.CoNNekT LabNUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceIslamabadPakistan
  2. 2.College of ComputerQassim UniversityBuraydahSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations