A performance analysis of a wireless body-area network monitoring system for professional cycling

A review by Viktorio el Hakim Date: 29.09.2013

1.

Evaluation of work and contribution

This article supposedly presents a novel approach in measurement and data gathering for the field of biomechanical engineering. In particular, it proposes a new system which would potentially replace the currently accepted scientific systems for evaluation of professional cyclists' performance. These systems are usually implemented in a limited time and space environment. The goal of the research is to gradually move from confined testing environment methods to real-time and real-life ones. The idea is to document the new approach and the methods used to analyze and measure the performance of a complete prototype system. The work would significantly improve the training regime of professional cyclists, by providing the means of self evaluation and performance measurement during daily training sessions. Most importantly without too much hassle and additional assistance. The data gathered afterward is will be more realistic than laboratory based measurements and so of much greater value to bio-mechanical research. This method is not restricted only to professional cycling but also other disciplines where physical performance evaluation is re uired. The title provides a short but to the point introduction for the reader about the main topic. It gives a clarification that this article does not provide thorough information about the research itself, but rather discusses the analysis and evaluation of a prototype system. The choice and amount of keywords is sufficient to provide a clear idea to the reader about the main topic. !eading into the abstract, one can easily familiarize him"her#self with the topic of the article but also get a general idea of the purpose of discussed research. It pretty much summarizes the whole article in an ade uate way. The article provides both a comprehensive description and discussion about the research involved. $urthermore it's well complemented by an e%tensive e%perimental and results section. &uch attributes make the article uite relevant to the research of bio-mechanical evaluation systems. There are a lot of valid points and challenges that one can face when designing a performance evaluation system with wireless sensor networks for professional cycling. $or e%ample proper sensor calibration, data distribution, portability and power consumption are all important factors to make the final product suitable for professional athletes. 's such these problems are assessed properly in the article. The e%perimental data and comparisons with another type of gold standard system are more than sufficient to convince the reader, that the methods discussed work. !egardless, it cannot serve as a baseline for further development and improvement in the bio-mechanics area of research, because of its constrained nature. In particular, it provides data and theory about one particular system, instead of focusing on the general case. 's time passes, the methods used and measurements will become deprecated. (ith that said however, it sparks a lot of interest in the area of body networks, since it presents fresh and innovative ideas. 'dditionally it provides sufficient information for improvement in the fields of wireless sensor networks "(&)# and motion measurement using Inertial Measurement *nits "IM*#. Taking the date into consideration, the article has been available to the public since +,-,. *p until now, there haven't been many citations, proving the point that it isn't long term material.

2.

Originality

The ideas about body motion and angle measurement using various IM* sensors presented in the article are not uite original in nature. In fact, as clearly stated in the article, the theory presented is general knowledge and already widely used by various other systems before the release of this article. .ne could say the method used for the particular application in mind is uni ue. /ut since the research revolves mostly around (&) and its analysis, a fairly new and une%plored area, it certainly brings new methodologies to the table about the way bio-mechanical testing can be performed nowadays.

3.

Quality of presentation

The terminology and language usage in the work is of very high uality. It complies very well the modern standard of scientific documentation. The te%t is easy to read and follow. The article makes use of a lot of referenced work. 0articularly about the environment sensing methods. Most importantly citations from all of the references are complementing the te%t uite nicely. (hen it comes to structure, the te%t is divided into several sections, each concentrating on its particular topic. The organization and order of the sections follows a standard introduction-description-implementation-results pattern. Therefore the information is presented in a very methodical way. 1onsidering the main topic discussed, the amount of information presented is sufficient. 0erhaps maybe a little bit too abstract at certain points, but solidified eventually with a good amount of results. The length is 2ust right to fit all of the information regarding the main topic of the article. 0erhaps one of the strongest features of this article is the amount and uality of visual pointers to the reader, such as tables, illustrations and graphs. Illustrations in particular serve their purpose uite well for e%plaining parts of the te%t, which would be uite hard to understand otherwise or at least be very perple%ing. The uality of the illustrations is also of high standard and uite straightforward. The tables and graphs presented are e%plained very well in the te%t, regarding the usefulness and significance of the data. 0roper annotations prevent any ambiguity that might occur to the reader.

!ec"nical correctness

0erhaps the weakest attribute of this article is the approach tests were performed. In particular, the research discussed focuses on outdoor applications for said implementation, yet all of the e%periments have been performed indoors. This violates the idea of the whole research. 3ven though the authors try to compare the working system with another state of the art one, it would have made more sense to perform tests for its intended purposes. In fact, the article brings a mention of certain interferences induced indoors, which might have influenced the measurements. 'dditionally there is a lack of testing on individual nodes. &uch information would be particularly useful for determining the amount of power used, computational responsiveness and payload. &ince one of the goals is to make the system as embedded and pervasive as possible, performing more measurements in these areas would have been highly beneficial to the research and informative to the reader. 'nother downfall is the fact that there is still limited information about the system. The protocol used for wireless communication for e%ample has not been discussed and or documented. &pecifications such as node size, data transfer speeds and benchmarking are not presented. This can leave doubts into the readers mind about the soundness of the results. (ith that said however, the researchers have done a very nice 2ob of compiling all of the measurements. The methods used are uite acceptable. The data presented in the graphs and table is credible and coherent. In the end the potential idea of replacing static laboratory based systems with dynamic portable ones makes a lot of sense. It is clearly visible that both measured systems have very similar performance characteristics. Thus the main purpose of the article has been served. .verall the main problem with the research methodology is the lack of additional nonenvironment constrained testing.

#.

$inal verdict

The article brings a lot very interesting topics and backs them up with e%tensive amounts of data. It is very well written and structurally sound. The ideas discussed are innovative and very practical. The te%t is a pleasure to read and follow. In fact, one might not need prior knowledge to bio-mechanical research in order to understand the significance of this research and the measurements involved. 4owever the uality of e%perimentation needs more improvement. There are a lot of areas left untouched as mentioned earlier. This might not be a huge problem for the state of the research was at the time it was performed, but it can be important in proving the fle%ibility and portability of the whole system, a claim made by the authors themselves. !egardless, the article should be accepted for publishing.