3D Dynamic Pose Estimation from Marker-Based Optical Data

  • W. Scott Selbie
  • Marcus J. Brown
Reference work entry


The desire to capture images of human movement has existed since prehistoric times (see chapter “Observing and Revealing the Hidden Structure of the Human Form in Motion Throughout the Centuries”). However, it is only since the late nineteenth century and the development of cameras able to capture multiple sequential images that the recording and quantitative analysis of movement has become possible. With modern cameras and high computational power now available, it is commonplace for researchers and clinicians to make detailed measurements, from which an estimation of the position and orientation (pose) of a human body during motion can be computed. This chapter focuses on the estimation of dynamic 3D pose based on optical motion capture systems that record the 3D location of markers attached to the body (see Fig. 1). In this chapter, we describe the estimation of the pose of a multibody model comprising segments that are connected by joints that constrain the direction and range of motion between those segments. There are three common deterministic solutions to the problem of pose estimation; direct, single body, and multibody. This chapter focuses on the two optimization methods, single body and multibody, that provide a deterministic and a discriminative solution to the problem of pose estimation. Unlike the direct pose estimation, these two approaches mitigate, to some extent, uncertainty in the data.


Skeletal modeling Pose estimation Motion-capture Inverse kinematics Soft tissue artifact Optimization 


  1. Andriacchi TP, Alexander EJ, Toney MK, Dyrby C, Sum J (1998) A point cluster method for in vivo motion analysis: applied to a study of knee kinematics. J Biomech Eng 120:743–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Begon M, Bélaise C, Naaim A, Lundberg A, Chèze L (2016) Multibody kinematics optimization with marker projection improves the accuracy of the humerus rotational kinematics. J Biomech (16):31111–31113Google Scholar
  3. Cappozzo A, Catani F, Croce UD, Leardini A (1995) Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: anatomical definition and determination. Clin Biomech 10(4):171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cappozzo A, Catani F, Leardini A, Benedetti MG, Della Croce U (1996) Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: experimental artefacts. Clin Biomech 11(2):90–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cappozzo A, Cappello A, Della Croce U, Pensalfini F (1997) Surface-marker cluster design criteria for 3-D bone movement reconstruction. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 44(12):1165–1174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cereatti A, Della Croce U, Cappozzo A (2006) Reconstruction of skeletal movement using skin markers: comparative assessment of bone pose estimators. J Neuro Eng Rehabil 3(1):7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Higginson JS, Neptune RR, Anderson FC (2005) Simulated parallel annealing within a neighborhood for optimization of biomechanical systems. J Biomech 38:1938–1942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ingber L (2012) In: Oliveira H, Petraglia A, Ingber L, Machado M, Petraglia M (eds) Adaptive simulated annealing, in stochastic global optimization and its applications with fuzzy adaptive simulated annealing. Springer, New York, pp 33–61Google Scholar
  9. Kepple T, Stanhope S (2000) Moved software. In: Winters, Crago (eds) Biomechanics and neural control of posture and movement. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Loper M, Mahmood N, Romero J, Pons-Mol G, Black MJ (2015) SMPL: a skinned multi-person linear model. ACM Trans Graph 34(6):248:1–248:16. ACMCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lu TW, O’Connor JJ (1999) Bone position estimation from skin marker co-ordinates using global optimization with joint constraints. J Biomech 32:129–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Miller R, Hamill J (2015) Optimal footfall patterns for cost minimization in running. J Biomech 48:2858–2864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schulz BW, Kimmel WL (2010) Can hip and knee kinematics be improved by eliminating thigh markers?Clinical. Biomechanics 25(2010):687–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Spoor C, Veldpaus F (1980) Rigid body motion calculated from spatial coordinates of markers. J Biomech 13(4):391–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Todorov E (2007) Probabilistic inference of multijoint movements, skeletal parameters and marker attachment from diverse motion capture data. IEEE Trans on Biomed Eng 54:1927–1939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Van Den Bogert AJ, Su A (2008) A weighted least squares method for inverse dynamic analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 11(1):3–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Weinhandl JT, Armstrong BSR, Kusik TP, Barrows RT, O’Connor KM (2010) Validation of a single camera three-dimensional motion tracking system. J Biomech 43(7):1437–1440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Yeadon MR (1984) The mechanics of twisting somersaults. Doctoral thesis. University of CalgaryGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.HAS-Motion, Inc.KingstonCanada
  2. 2.C-Motion Inc.GermantownUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • William Scott Selbie
    • 1
  1. 1.Research, C-Motion, Inc.GermantownUSA

Personalised recommendations