ArticleScientific reports2025
Predicting badminton outcomes through machine learning and technical action frequencies.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indicator analysis of the footwork in the world's top badminton athletes based on markerless motion measurement.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- The role of maturation in upper-limb plyometric vs. technical plyometric training for youth badminton players.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Using Inertial Measurement Units to Quantify External Load in Men's Singles Badminton Matches: Insights from Set Outcomes and Score Gaps.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2025Article
- Random forest-based identification and ranking of predictive factors for physical activity in Chinese college students.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of machine learning techniques to predict badminton match outcomes through the analysis of technical actions seems to represent an area that has not yet been extensively investigated within the existing body of research. This study aims to interpret this phenomenon by developing a predictive model based on the frequency of technical actions, utilizing machine learning techniques. Focusing on international competitions from 2019 to 2023, we collected data on 23 distinct technical actions (e.g., Net Front, Slice/Drop, Push) to construct predictive models. The study distinguishes itself by employing a Random Forest algorithm to ascertain the significance of each technical action, utilizing forward stepwise selection and 5-fold cross-validation for feature refinement. SHAP value analysis further validated the pivotal roles of 'Net Front', 'Slice/Drop', and 'Push' across both sexes, linking higher frequencies of 'Net Front' with increased match-winning probabilities. Model validation on a test set demonstrated effective performance in both sexes, with the model based on male data exhibiting higher accuracy and predictive values, surpassing the performance of the female data model. This comprehensive examination, grounded in quantitative analysis, not only enhances our understanding of badminton gameplay dynamics but also offers valuable insights for coaching strategies and training methodologies. To extend the applicability of our findings and facilitate user engagement, we developed a web application based on our model. This platform enables players, coaches, and researchers to input player characteristics and receive strategic recommendation through an intuitive interface, further leveraging the machine learning model's capabilities to support tactical decision-making before badminton competitions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.