4.6 Article

A Novel Method for Classification of Running Fatigue Using Change-Point Segmentation

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 19, Issue 21, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s19214729

Keywords

surface-electromyography; blood lactate concentration; random forest; running; fatigue

Funding

  1. Knowledge Foundation through the research profile Centre for Applied Intelligence Research (CAISR) at Halmstad University
  2. company Swedish Adrenaline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Blood lactate accumulation is a crucial fatigue indicator during sports training. Previous studies have predicted cycling fatigue using surface-electromyography (sEMG) to non-invasively estimate lactate concentration in blood. This study used sEMG to predict muscle fatigue while running and proposes a novel method for the automatic classification of running fatigue based on sEMG. Data were acquired from 12 runners during an incremental treadmill running-test using sEMG sensors placed on the vastus-lateralis, vastus-medialis, biceps-femoris, semitendinosus, and gastrocnemius muscles of the right and left legs. Blood lactate samples of each runner were collected every two minutes during the test. A change-point segmentation algorithm labeled each sample with a class of fatigue level as (1) aerobic, (2) anaerobic, or (3) recovery. Three separate random forest models were trained to classify fatigue using 36 frequency, 51 time-domain, and 36 time-event sEMG features. The models were optimized using a forward sequential feature elimination algorithm. Results showed that the random forest trained using distributive power frequency of the sEMG signal of the vastus-lateralis muscle alone could classify fatigue with high accuracy. Importantly for this feature, group-mean ranks were significantly different (p < 0.01) between fatigue classes. Findings support using this model for monitoring fatigue levels during running.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available