ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Performance Evaluation of Monocular Markerless Pose Estimation Systems for Industrial Exoskeletons.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- DualPose: Dual-Block Transformer Decoder with Contrastive Denoising for Multi-Person Pose Estimation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Abstract
Industrial exoskeletons (a.k.a. wearable robots) have been developed to reduce musculoskeletal fatigue and work injuries. Human joint kinematics and human-robot alignment are important measurements in understanding the effects of industrial exoskeletons. Recently, markerless pose estimation systems based on monocular color (red, green, blue-RGB) and depth cameras are being used to estimate human joint positions. This study analyzes the performance of monocular markerless pose estimation systems on human skeletal joint estimation while wearing exoskeletons. Two pose estimation systems producing RGB and depth images from ten viewpoints are evaluated for one subject in 14 industrial poses. The experiment was repeated for three different types of exoskeletons on the same subject. An optical tracking system (OTS) was used as a reference system. The image acceptance rate was 56% for the RGB, 22% for the depth, and 78% for the OTS pose estimation system. The key sources of pose estimation error were the occlusions from the exoskeletons, industrial poses, and viewpoints. The reference system showed decreased performance when the optical markers were occluded by the exoskeleton or when the markers' position shifted with the exoskeleton. This study performs a systematic comparison of two types of monocular markerless pose estimation systems and an optical tracking system, as well as a proposed metric, based on a tracking quality ratio, to assess whether a skeletal joint estimation would be acceptable for human kinematics analysis in exoskeleton studies.
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.