Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40258880›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Deep learning-based recognition model of football player's technical action behavior using PCA-LBP algorithm.

Hongtao Chen, Zhengbai Lin, Quan Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hongtao ChenSchool of Physical Education and Health, Yulin Normal University, Yulin, 537000, Guangxi, China.
Zhengbai LinSchool of Foreign Languages, Yulin Normal University, Yulin, 537000, Guangxi, China.
Quan XuSchool of Physical Education and Health, Yulin Normal University, Yulin, 537000, Guangxi, China. xuquan0201@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Football is a sport that requires sportsmen to have both physical strength and physical features. It must consider the distinctions between individuals and then provide targeted training. Football players can perform better on the field with targeted scientific training, but scientific training is based on identifying football players' technical actions and behaviors. Deep learning allows machines to emulate the behavior of humans, like sight, hearing, and thought. It solves a wide range of complicated pattern recognition issues. The deep learning procedure, in particular, is distinctive in its capacity to recognize images with great precision and offers technical assistance for analyzing and recognizing football players' behavior actions. However, traditional football action recognition mainly uses the standard local binary pattern (LBP) for recognition. In image recognition, problems include the high dimension of football technical action recognition data and inaccurate recognition. Principal component analysis (PCA) can be used to perform dimensionality reduction analysis on the technical action behavior of football players to reduce the amount of calculation in the process of technical action recognition. This paper compared and analyzed football players' technical action behavior recognition based on the PCA-LBP algorithm and the traditional LBP recognition. The data comparing the two algorithms are based on data from 200 football players at a football match in 2020. This paper mainly counts the specific stadium information of football players and the data samples of football technical action recognition. In addition, it uses the four technical actions of kicking, dribbling, stopping, and fake action as indicators to evaluate the accuracy of technical action recognition. The experimental results showed that the recognition accuracy of the PCA-LBP algorithm is 2% higher than that of the LBP algorithm when the number of kicking action recognition is 50 times. When the number of recognition times was 300, the recognition accuracy of the PCA-LBP algorithm was 24% higher than that of the LBP algorithm. The PCA-LBP algorithm also has higher recognition accuracy when comparing dribbling, stopping, and fake action. Therefore, using PCA to decrease the dimension of the LBP algorithm can enhance the accuracy of the recognition of the technical action behavior of football players.

Indexed as

AthletesAthletic PerformanceDeep LearningPattern Recognition, AutomatedSoccerAlgorithmsHumansMalePrincipal Component AnalysisDeep learningLocal binary patternPrincipal component analysisSoccer playerTechnical action behavior recognition

Identifiers

PMID40258880
PMCPMC12012089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.